# Canon EOS R5 launch price will be below $4000 USD [CR3]



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 26, 2020)

> The most asked question currently about the Canon EOS R5 is how much will it cost? Rumors have been mostly fueled by speculation on some retailer web sites.
> I have been told that the Canon EOS R5 will come in under $4000 USD for the body, the source didn’t want to divulge the exact launch price for anonymity reasons, but it has apparently been set.
> With the announcement for the Canon EOS R5 coming in July, I should start to hear more about pricing and kits in the coming weeks.



Continue reading...


----------



## melgross (May 26, 2020)

Well, that’s something. I don’t expect that anyone here believed it would be more.


----------



## dancan (May 26, 2020)

3.999,99


----------



## jeffa4444 (May 26, 2020)

$ 3,999 US but in rip-off Britain that will translate to £ 3,999 maybe more.


----------



## koenkooi (May 26, 2020)

Hmmm, it went from "Initial availability could come as early as July." to "announcement for the Canon EOS R5 coming in July"


----------



## PhotoRN86 (May 26, 2020)

melgross said:


> Well, that’s something. I don’t expect that anyone here believed it would be more.




You must not have read the other forum post when the previous pricing rumor came out... plenty of people thought it would be well over 4K because of the specs. This is perfect for me and within my planned budget for this camera


----------



## privatebydesign (May 26, 2020)

jeffa4444 said:


> $ 3,999 US but in rip-off Britain that will translate to £ 3,999 maybe more.


Why do people insist on saying this every time a price for anything is mentioned? UK prices are listed inclusive of tax USA prices are not. In the UK the health service is included in your tax bill, in the USA it is not, personally I'd pay a few hundred dollars more each time I bought a camera and got health insurance included, in the USA you 'save' a few hundred dollars on the cost of your camera and spend $500 every single month on health insurance because "Freedom".


----------



## yeahright (May 26, 2020)

probably 4499 in EUR = 4939 USD


----------



## bsbeamer (May 26, 2020)

Most seemed to expect around $3500-3750 for a true mirrorless 5D4 replacement. Let's hope they're available to purchase in normal quantities before end of 2020.


----------



## Atlasman (May 26, 2020)

Great news!


----------



## jolyonralph (May 26, 2020)

$3,999 USD in US before sales tax equals (approximately)


€3,700 before tax, or ~ €4,400 with tax in EU

£3,250 before tax, or ~ £3,850 with VAT in UK


Now, I'd expect the EU and UK base prices to be higher because Canon (and every other manufacturer) build in a margin to protect themselves from currency fluctuations. It's bad form to set an RRP, and then have to adjust it in 3 months because the currency is worth less against the dollar. 

So I'd call 4499 EUR and 3999 GBP retail prices assuming the retail price in the US is $3999


----------



## Eclipsed (May 26, 2020)

$3999 was my prediction for a long time. Sony killer at that price. Will sell lots of expensive RF lenses.


----------



## The3o5FlyGuy (May 26, 2020)

dancan said:


> 3.999,99


more like, $3999.98


----------



## herein2020 (May 26, 2020)

As I've been saying for months...
$3999.00 USD - R5
$2499.00 USD - R6

The more important part of this whole CR3 is that it seems it will now be announced in July...what happened to announced in June available by July? I bet the next CR3 will be to state that the camera strap mount has passed some sort of certification. And why is so little being mentioned about the R6?


----------



## Uneternal (May 26, 2020)

Thats would be a bold move of Canon cause it basically renders the 1DX3 obsolete.


----------



## Fbimages (May 26, 2020)

Now is a good time to stock up on CF express cards. ProGrade run a sale until the end of May with -25% on all products


----------



## hunck (May 26, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Why do people insist on saying this every time a price for anything is mentioned? UK prices are listed inclusive of tax USA prices are not. In the UK the health service is included in your tax bill, in the USA it is not, personally I'd pay a few hundred dollars more each time I bought a camera and got health insurance included, in the USA you 'save' a few hundred dollars on the cost of your camera and spend $500 every single month on health insurance because "Freedom".



The cheapest Ford Mustang V8 in the Netherlands is priced euro 123.000,- so that's $135.000,- Taxes are high. My income tax alone is 55% (well, before covid was fashion)... But camera stuff is reasonably priced. It's 30% more than the advertised USA-price but 21% of that is VAT. 
Anyway. The 5R will be expensive when you add the grip and battery, a few CF express cards and the new external wifi transmitter...


----------



## tianxiaozhang (May 26, 2020)

If it's under 4000CAD my order will be on Day 1 too...


----------



## herein2020 (May 26, 2020)

Uneternal said:


> Thats would be a bold move of Canon cause it basically renders the 1DX3 obsolete.



Not at all, the R5 is not a sports shooter (from what we know so far), it will not win over OVF shooters (myself included), it is not as rugged as the 1DXIII, it will definitely not be used at the Olympics, etc. The 1D series has always been a specialist camera which is a niche that the R5 does not fill; pricing is not everything; that's like saying it will render the C200 obsolete just because it is cheaper and on paper has some better video features.


----------



## padam (May 26, 2020)

a whole new wave of YouTube reaction videos incoming...


----------



## herein2020 (May 26, 2020)

hunck said:


> The cheapest Ford Mustang V8 in the Netherlands is priced euro 123.000,- so that's $135.000,- Taxes are high. My income tax alone is 55% (well, before covid was fashion)... But camera stuff is reasonably priced. It's 30% more than the advertised USA-price but 21% of that is VAT.
> Anyway. The 5R will be expensive when you add the grip and battery, a few CF express cards and the new external wifi transmitter...



In the USA, depending on the website that you order it from you won't pay any taxes on the camera. Are you supposed to then self report at the end of the year..yes, does anyone do that, that's a different story. And we are still talking about buying new, in the used market taxes are all but non existent.


----------



## Architect1776 (May 26, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> $3999 was my prediction for a long time. Sony killer at that price. Will sell lots of expensive RF lenses.



I personally think it will be less but am happy at anything less than 4K. What I love about the RF mount is that it is not compatible with the Sony mount so no more using the superb and superior Canon lenses on your Sony. If you want the fantastic RF lenses you will need to go Canon all the way. Brilliant move on Canon's part. PS the same can be said for Nikon as well with their new S mount. 
This will really hurt Sony more than the camera itself as their minuscule mount does have development limitations, it is even smaller than the little Canon M mount.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 26, 2020)

hunck said:


> The cheapest Ford Mustang V8 in the Netherlands is priced euro 123.000,- so that's $135.000,- Taxes are high. My income tax alone is 55% (well, before covid was fashion)... But camera stuff is reasonably priced. It's 30% more than the advertised USA-price but 21% of that is VAT.
> Anyway. The 5R will be expensive when you add the grip and battery, a few CF express cards and the new external wifi transmitter...


Taxes are high and so are social benefits, that is the choice the country makes, people bleating about ‘rip off’ wherever every time a price Is announced conveniently ignore that. Nobody but a fool expects low taxes and generous social benefit programs.

Meanwhile we here in the USA can fly fighter jets over healthcare workers to ‘show respect’ when I think they would be better served with a decent supply of PPE.

As for the Mustang, what special import tariffs and taxes are put on that either to protect the environment or other European performance car manufacturers? Ford aren’t getting anything like $135,000 per Mustang sold in Europe!


----------



## Architect1776 (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> In the USA, depending on the website that you order it from you won't pay any taxes on the camera. Are you supposed to then self report at the end of the year..yes, does anyone do that, that's a different story. And we are still talking about buying new, in the used market taxes are all but non existent.



Most now are collecting taxes here under new guidelines that could punish them for not collecting and those who do not collect have a pricing system internally that makes you think you are not paying but they are paying or reporting it themselves.


----------



## herein2020 (May 26, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> I personally think it will be less but am happy at anything less than 4K. What I love about the RF mount is that it is not compatible with the Sony mount so no more using the superb and superior Canon lenses on your Sony. If you want the fantastic RF lenses you will need to go Canon all the way. Brilliant move on Canon's part. PS the same can be said for Nikon as well with their new S mount.
> This will really hurt Sony more than the camera itself as their minuscule mount does have development limitations, it is even smaller than the little Canon M mount.



I have always found that amusing; people who trash Canon at every turn then go buy an adapter and use nothing but Canon lenses on their Sony bodies. I do think the RF mount hurts Canon as well though, sure there's an adapter but with RF lenses costing more than their EF equivalents, and the fact that the new bodies aren't native to the EF mount; these factors can't help but slow adoption.



Architect1776 said:


> Most now are collecting taxes here under new guidelines that could punish them for not collecting and those who do not collect have a pricing system internally that makes you think you are not paying but they are paying or reporting it themselves.



The larger sites yes (especially Amazon), but you might be surprised at how many smaller sites still don't collect taxes. Even B&H didn't collect taxes on my recent purchase. It's really based on the state the company is in, the local laws of that state, and the laws of the state that you reside in.


----------



## domo_p1000 (May 26, 2020)

Uneternal said:


> Thats would be a bold move of Canon cause it basically renders the 1DX3 obsolete.


Not a huge market overlap, but one that will inevitably grow. However, this will not stop the development of the EOS-1R with a form factor more akin to the EOS-1.
I am one of those boring luddites who likes big, heavy cameras and has been using the EOS-1 range since 1989!


----------



## slclick (May 26, 2020)

It's a 5 series body, it will be priced in the historical range.


----------



## David_E (May 26, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> _What I love about the RF mount is that it is not compatible with the Sony mount so no more using the superb and superior Canon lenses on your Sony._


Sounds mean-spirited and spiteful. Why would you possibly care if people use Canon lenses on Sony cameras? Do you by any chance have a redneck sticker on your pickup showing a nasty-looking kid pissing on a competing brand name?


----------



## amorse (May 26, 2020)

tianxiaozhang said:


> If it's under 4000CAD my order will be on Day 1 too...


I wouldn't bet on that - $4000 CAD is just under $2900 USD. Under $5k CAD I can see, but $4000 CAD seems unlikely to me.


----------



## vjlex (May 26, 2020)

I suspected (hoped?) it would be under $4K, but worried that it might not. Glad to have some assurance. Now it's just to figure out whether I can budget for an RF lens to go along with it, or will that be later in the year. Hopefully the announcement will actually be in June and the release will be July. Waiting another month just to confirm the specs is a bit much.


----------



## PhotoRN86 (May 26, 2020)

David_E said:


> Sounds mean-spirited and spiteful. Why would you possibly care if people use Canon lenses on Sony cameras? Do you by any chance have a redneck sticker on your pickup showing a nasty-looking kid pissing on a competing brand name?




There you go again, well if anything you’re just as bad as you claim him to be, I’ve seen your other posts from these recent forums, you’re just attempting to high horse anyone on a whim, I saw you randomly throw out the COVID crisis out of nowhere on someone who was just enjoying cameras like we all do on here... you sir are toxic on here, I’m a RN and working on a COVID unit too, and I come here to keep my sanity by enjoying my photography life, and to see you do that the other day was clearly offensive to me and showed me that enjoy randomly trying to high horse people to the point it clearly shows that you’re just on here to make yourself feel or seem better.


----------



## padam (May 26, 2020)

New R5 teaser video in German:






IBIS working, I guess they've got the megapixel count wrong though (they claim 35 megapixels instead of 45)


----------



## wsmith96 (May 26, 2020)

Outta my price range.


----------



## cayenne (May 26, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> $3,999 USD in US before sales tax equals (approximately)
> 
> 
> €3,700 before tax, or ~ €4,400 with tax in EU
> ...




Well, depending on where you live, you can still order from B&H and they won't charge you sales tax...so, there is THAT too in much of the US.



Or..so I hear.


----------



## VICYASA (May 26, 2020)

Amazing, breaking news... just riveting. In other breaking news, it will also be available fo pre-order at B&H and Adorama Camera. You heard it here 1st, folks.


----------



## magarity (May 26, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Why do people insist on saying this every time a price for anything is mentioned? UK prices are listed inclusive of tax USA prices are not. In the UK the health service is included in your tax bill, in the USA it is not, personally I'd pay a few hundred dollars more each time I bought a camera and got health insurance included, in the USA you 'save' a few hundred dollars on the cost of your camera and spend $500 every single month on health insurance because "Freedom".


In the US, some people spend a lot on individual health care insurance because "payroll taxes". Back when income tax and payroll deductions were introduced, employer provided health insurance was decreed not to be income and thus not taxable. So employers were thus encouraged to provide it as a way to attract employees. From there it just spread wildly. The unintended side effect was that small / self employers have higher costs. Disparate costs leads into a whole different can of worms centered mainly around health care providers' severely dysfunctional opaque pricing and discounting. "Freedom" doesn't really have much to do with it compared to tax accounting.


----------



## xps (May 26, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> $3,999 USD in US before sales tax equals (approximately)
> 
> 
> €3,700 before tax, or ~ €4,400 with tax in EU
> ...


The Question will be, how much will they want to have for the accessories. New batteries, grips... maybe upgrades.... Might be, that the price of the body is low, but the surroundings are priced higher than usual.

The Rf series prices are more than opulent compared to EF series prices.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (May 26, 2020)

padam said:


> New R5 teaser video in German:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Apparently they are talking about extracting 35mp stills from the 8k footage not the total sensor resolution


----------



## H. Jones (May 26, 2020)

Waiting for the Sony trolls to show up complaining that the R5 doesn't have 4k (as a price)


----------



## vjlex (May 26, 2020)

padam said:


> New R5 teaser video in German:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I noticed that 35 MP too. Any chance that was in reference to the resolution of the image that could be pulled from the video? This seemed to only talk about the video specs in detail.

(Also, did that music remind anyone else of Stranger Things?)

EDIT: ninja'd by @Chris.Chapterten


----------



## Aregal (May 26, 2020)

Fbimages said:


> Now is a good time to stock up on CF express cards. ProGrade run a sale until the end of May with -25% on all products


Haha. That's how I convince my self to by new cameras; buy necessary accessories first.


----------



## xps (May 26, 2020)

padam said:


> New R5 teaser video in German:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, the speaker said, that shots, taken form the 8k videos will have 35MP


----------



## sanj (May 26, 2020)

Sometimes if feels good to say "I knew it!" And I still think it will be $3699


----------



## [email protected] (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Not at all, the R5 is not a sports shooter (from what we know so far), it will not win over OVF shooters (myself included), it is not as rugged as the 1DXIII, it will definitely not be used at the Olympics, etc. The 1D series has always been a specialist camera which is a niche that the R5 does not fill; pricing is not everything; that's like saying it will render the C200 obsolete just because it is cheaper and on paper has some better video features.



I don't know about that. There are instances when the resolution bump is important for sports people too. The mechanical shutter speed of 12 fps is really the comparison point, as sports shots really do suffer from electronic shutter jello effect. There will be times when 12 fps disadvantage isn't as great as the 20 megapixel disadvantage of the 1d3. Lots will depend on other things, like buffer depth. Still too early to tell.


----------



## davo (May 26, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> Hmmm, it went from "Initial availability could come as early as July." to "announcement for the Canon EOS R5 coming in July"


That's the info I GOT FROM THIS


----------



## Trey T (May 26, 2020)

Anyone say price higher than $3500 should be ban ... lol


----------



## Dragon (May 26, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Why do people insist on saying this every time a price for anything is mentioned? UK prices are listed inclusive of tax USA prices are not. In the UK the health service is included in your tax bill, in the USA it is not, personally I'd pay a few hundred dollars more each time I bought a camera and got health insurance included, in the USA you 'save' a few hundred dollars on the cost of your camera and spend $500 every single month on health insurance because "Freedom".


A bit off topic, but health insurance and health care are not the same thing. NHS is not 'health care" by US standards. You wait for everything and if you are "too old", good luck getting a knee replacement or even heart surgery. There is just no return on investment in you. That is the essence of socialized medicine.


----------



## hne (May 26, 2020)

padam said:


> New R5 teaser video in German:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He says that the resolution of raw frames extracted from an 8K raw video would be 35Mpx. Nothing else.


----------



## Go Wild (May 26, 2020)

Now we´re talking!!!   
So..first things first....The price is awesome for this camera! And that makes me a buyer for total sure! I am happy!At this price point, Canon will seriously injure the competition, i´m quite sure of it! 

But...so according to Canonrumors, the announcement is in July? So that means this June announcement is for The EOS R6? AAvailability and announcement are 2 different things... so i presume my retailer was right and we only going to have the camera in Mid-September....That´s the worse part...Almost 1 year in rumors and parcial announcements...This can drive us to insanity!!


----------



## Liverpool FC (May 26, 2020)

dancan said:


> 3.999,99


Yeah. That always seems to be the case. We get ripped off here.


----------



## Treyarnon (May 26, 2020)

R5 needs to significantly below 4k in my opinion. (just sayin')



privatebydesign said:


> Why do people insist on saying this every time a price for anything is mentioned? UK prices are listed inclusive of tax USA prices are not. In the UK the health service is included in your tax bill, in the USA it is not, personally I'd pay a few hundred dollars more each time I bought a camera and got health insurance included, in the USA you 'save' a few hundred dollars on the cost of your camera and spend $500 every single month on health insurance because "Freedom".


Its experience.
It has been a 'rule of thumb' for years and is pretty accurate.

For example:
price of 1Dx3 in USA: $6500 (BHP)
price of 1Dx3 in UK: £6500 (WEX)

Used BHP and Wex as they are both large camera retailers, so 'like for like' as it were.

FYI - the NHS is awesome, and is payed through general taxation. You really cannot say 'this % of the sale price' of anything you buy if specifically for the NHS.


----------



## LensFungus (May 26, 2020)

Oh no, I already sold my firstborn!


----------



## SecureGSM (May 26, 2020)

padam said:


> a whole new wave of YouTube reaction videos incoming...


It is a good time for stocking up on your popcorn right now. I predict, that popcorn will be in a short supply for quite a while once R5 was released into the wild.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 26, 2020)

Dragon said:


> A bit off topic, but health insurance and health care are not the same thing. NHS is not 'health care" by US standards. You wait for everything and if you are "too old", good luck getting a knee replacement or even heart surgery. There is just no return on investment in you. That is the essence of socialized medicine.


Have you paid the price of individual health insurance in the USA? Have you tried to get coverage, pay for prescription drugs that cost pennies in other countries?

But put all that aside because it sounds too much like politics, I am not into politics but just look at the total numbers, in the USA we average over $10,000 per person per year, that is $200 every week, $1,600 a month is slightly under the monthly bill for my wife and I, in the UK you spend $4,000 a year per person. So does the USA get a 2.5 times better outcome than the UK? No, in actual fact it is slightly worse than the UK when measured against mortality per 100,000 people.

You say you wait for everything, my father has had many health issues and has never waited longer than a reasonable time for anything, he is in his 80’s and recently had a pacemaker fitted, he has had several heart bypasses and stents and he lives in the UK. Meanwhile it is only in the last few years that USA ‘health care’ companies have been forced to abandon the cruel practice of excluding anybody with preconditions, what kind of care is that? If you need care you are excluded from getting it!


----------



## Architect1776 (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> I have always found that amusing; people who trash Canon at every turn then go buy an adapter and use nothing but Canon lenses on their Sony bodies. I do think the RF mount hurts Canon as well though, sure there's an adapter but with RF lenses costing more than their EF equivalents, and the fact that the new bodies aren't native to the EF mount; these factors can't help but slow adoption.
> 
> 
> 
> The larger sites yes (especially Amazon), but you might be surprised at how many smaller sites still don't collect taxes. Even B&H didn't collect taxes on my recent purchase. It's really based on the state the company is in, the local laws of that state, and the laws of the state that you reside in.



I do not see EF adapter really hurting with the control ring and filter adapters. And finally 100% compatibility on the R cameras.
I have not even given it a second thought as to using an adapter. In fact I am really looking forward to using my FD, FL and R lenses on the R5. What a super expansion of capability for using unique old lenses. I still say Canon did it right and have done it right since the EF mount was introduced so the RF could come along and NO incompatibility like Nikon is horribly suffering now.


----------



## Architect1776 (May 26, 2020)

David_E said:


> Sounds mean-spirited and spiteful. Why would you possibly care if people use Canon lenses on Sony cameras? Do you by any chance have a redneck sticker on your pickup showing a nasty-looking kid pissing on a competing brand name?



It is just great that the Canon bashers, like you, will no longer be able to use the superior Canon lenses.


----------



## Matthew19 (May 26, 2020)

Get ready for "I just sat on a pineapple" youtube thumbnails.


----------



## Danglin52 (May 26, 2020)

cayenne said:


> Well, depending on where you live, you can still order from B&H and they won't charge you sales tax...so, there is THAT too in much of the US.
> 
> 
> 
> Or..so I hear.


You have to sign up for their Payboo credit card to receive a credit for the tax amount. Make sure you pay off the card before the due date because the annual interest rate is around 26%.


----------



## herein2020 (May 26, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> I do not see EF adapter really hurting with the control ring and filter adapters. And finally 100% compatibility on the R cameras.
> I have not even given it a second thought as to using an adapter. In fact I am really looking forward to using my FD, FL and R lenses on the R5. What a super expansion of capability for using unique old lenses. I still say Canon did it right and have done it right since the EF mount was introduced so the RF could come along and NO incompatibility like Nikon is horribly suffering now.



Canon is definitely doing it better than anyone else right now. The L mount was the only reason I did not pick up an S1H. I love the video features of the S1H but color science, AF, and the L mount made me wait for Canon to get it's act together.


----------



## mb66energy (May 26, 2020)

jeffa4444 said:


> $ 3,999 US but in rip-off Britain that will translate to £ 3,999 maybe more.


 ... and 4499 Euro in Germany ... but maybe ... bevor money looses its value and while there is no other way to spend it with some joy I will do that and give my EOS RP a big brother (or sister?).
I skipped 5D, 5Dii, 5Diii, 5div, EOS R waiting for the big one - maybe the R5 is the 5Dii equivalent in the boost of IQ and capabilities?!


----------



## Russ6357 (May 26, 2020)

I recon £3850 ro £3899 in the UK - maybe a kit with some cards and an RF lens converter for a bit over £4K.

I just bought a new 600 MKIII and this is the body that will spend much time on (wildlife)....


----------



## privatebydesign (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> I have always found that amusing; people who trash Canon at every turn then go buy an adapter and use nothing but Canon lenses on their Sony bodies. I do think the RF mount hurts Canon as well though, sure there's an adapter but with RF lenses costing more than their EF equivalents, and the fact that the new bodies aren't native to the EF mount; these factors can't help but slow adoption.


I don’t see that there is a comparison in the idea of first party lenses using an in house glassless adapter with fully implemented communication protocols to the use of third party lenses via a different third party adapter none of whom are privy to each other’s communication protocols.

I see real benefits of using adapters for several EF lenses, indeed that is my main interest in an R body, the ability to filter my EF 15 fisheye, TS-E 17, and the 11-24. I can buy an RF body for less than the price of filter solutions for those three lenses!

Yes there are slight compromises using even glassless adapters, but in truth they are small but for my use the benefits vastly out weight them.


----------



## Drcampbellicu (May 26, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



That’s great news
This economy will make pricing even more important than usual


----------



## Whowe (May 26, 2020)

LensFungus said:


> Oh no, I already sold my firstborn!


I have to try to get my kidney back....


----------



## tpatana (May 26, 2020)

Sounds like i also need to find good deal on the 28-70mm then....


----------



## Richard Anthony (May 26, 2020)

That sounds about right , well done Canon for pricing it right .


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Not at all, the R5 is not a sports shooter (from what we know so far), it will not win over OVF shooters (myself included), it is not as rugged as the 1DXIII, it will definitely not be used at the Olympics, etc. The 1D series has always been a specialist camera which is a niche that the R5 does not fill; pricing is not everything; that's like saying it will render the C200 obsolete just because it is cheaper and on paper has some better video features.



It definitely will be used at the Olympics, assuming they actually happen in 2021. Not every photo assignment at an event like the Olympics involves shooting sports action with big whites from long distances. There are also a lot of human interest stories to be covered. Athletes enjoying the night life in the host communities. Families and friends of athletes who made the long journey to watch and support their loved one. What it's like to live in the athlete's village for a few weeks. How hosting an Olympic event affects the lives of the local residents. Ect.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> In the USA, depending on the website that you order it from you won't pay any taxes on the camera. Are you supposed to then self report at the end of the year..yes, does anyone do that, that's a different story. And we are still talking about buying new, in the used market taxes are all but non existent.



If you are buying from an authorized seller instead of grey market, not paying sales tax is becoming rarer and rarer as various states pass legislation that allows them to require out of state sellers to collect sales tax on items shipped to their state. This has really taken off since a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision ruled in favor of such states. B&H, Adorama, Amazon, etc. all now charge me 8% sales tax on all online purchases, even though none of them have a physical presence in my home state.


----------



## Richard Anthony (May 26, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> It definitely will be used at the Olympics, assuming they actually happen in 2021. Not every photo assignment at an event like the Olympics involves shooting sports action with big whites from long distances. There are also a lot of human interest stories to be covered. Athletes enjoying the night life in the host communities. Families and friends of athletes who made the long journey to watch and support their loved one. What it's like to live in the athlete's village for a few weeks. How hosting an Olympic event affects the lives of the local residents. Ect.


I should imagine that Canon will have an R1 out by the Olympics in 2021


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Taxes are high and so are social benefits, that is the choice the country makes, people bleating about ‘rip off’ wherever every time a price Is announced conveniently ignore that. Nobody but a fool expects low taxes and generous social benefit programs.
> 
> Meanwhile we here in the USA can fly fighter jets over healthcare workers to ‘show respect’ when I think they would be better served with a decent supply of PPE.
> 
> As for the Mustang, what special import tariffs and taxes are put on that either to protect the environment or other European performance car manufacturers? Ford aren’t getting anything like $135,000 per Mustang sold in Europe!



Those fighter jet flights are routine training missions that must be flown every month in order to keep pilots qualified by logging a minimum number of flight hours per month. If they weren't flying over hospitals, they'd still be flying over something somewhere.


----------



## Maximilian (May 26, 2020)

I hope, it'll be below 4,000 € here in EU, too. (incl. VAT) 
But I don't belive it.


----------



## jam05 (May 26, 2020)

If this is true, I suggest one to clear their credit card and preorder. Or it won't be "In Stock" longer than 30 minutes at a clip.


----------



## H. Jones (May 26, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Sounds like i also need to find good deal on the 28-70mm then....


Had just found one used for $2300 but hesitated just in case the R5 somehow turned out to be $6,000. Of course now that it's CR3 to be under 4000 the $2300 one just sold before I could nab it


----------



## jam05 (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Not at all, the R5 is not a sports shooter (from what we know so far), it will not win over OVF shooters (myself included), it is not as rugged as the 1DXIII, it will definitely not be used at the Olympics, etc. The 1D series has always been a specialist camera which is a niche that the R5 does not fill; pricing is not everything; that's like saying it will render the C200 obsolete just because it is cheaper and on paper has some better video features.


Not all sport shooter use a 1Dx device. If one has ever been to a sporting event on regular basis or a Track & field event, as I'm a coach myself, they would certainly see many a journalist wih 5Dm3s and 5Dmk4 units. The 1Dx may be the device that Canon has advertised as THE sports shooters camera. However it is NOT the only camera. By any means. Simply look at the images on the journalist and "sports shooters" posting. You would be surprised. I never took a 1Dx out on the track or pitch. Why? Because shooting images are just one part of the task. Track and Field meets last ALL flipin day and during the Olympics for few weeks. Prelims, finals etc. Never wanted to be tied down to that tank when leaving the venues. Or having to return directly to the hotel. It's a large item to be lugging around especially when we were in Rio de janeiro. There was very little that one needed at a competition that the 5d couldn't do. Nada. My athlete runs the 110m hurdles. Never had any problem and got images that many photogs with 1Dx's drooled over. Because I know the competition that I'm shooting. Most sporting events have predictable movements. There's a lot one can do with 8k frame grab also.


----------



## xanbarksdale (May 26, 2020)

Fantastic news. Ive already bought my memory cards, ha!

now ill be refreshing the BH site waiting to pre-order.


----------



## BillB (May 26, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I should imagine that Canon will have an R1 out by the Olympics in 2021


I’m not so sure that the R1 will be out that quickly. We will know more when we find out the AF performance of the R5 and how close they are to meeting the standards that an R1 will have to meet.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> I have always found that amusing; people who trash Canon at every turn then go buy an adapter and use nothing but Canon lenses on their Sony bodies. I do think the RF mount hurts Canon as well though, sure there's an adapter but with RF lenses costing more than their EF equivalents, and the fact that the new bodies aren't native to the EF mount; these factors can't help but slow adoption.
> 
> 
> 
> The larger sites yes (especially Amazon), but you might be surprised at how many smaller sites still don't collect taxes. Even B&H didn't collect taxes on my recent purchase. It's really based on the state the company is in, the local laws of that state, and the laws of the state that you reside in.



B&H has been charging sales tax on my purchases at least since the beginning of 2019. (Ditto for amazon, adorama, and most other non-camera related online retailers that aren't fly-by-night operations trying to fly beneath the radar.)


----------



## joestopper (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Not at all, the R5 is not a sports shooter (from what we know so far), it will not win over OVF shooters (myself included), it is not as rugged as the 1DXIII, it will definitely not be used at the Olympics, etc. The 1D series has always been a specialist camera which is a niche that the R5 does not fill; pricing is not everything; that's like saying it will render the C200 obsolete just because it is cheaper and on paper has some better video features.



" ... it will not win over OVF shooters ... "

Interesting level of arrogance to make statements on behalf of others. And remarkable level of ignorance to make conclusions before ever seen or tested ...


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

domo_p1000 said:


> Not a huge market overlap, but one that will inevitably grow. However, this will not stop the development of the EOS-1R with a form factor more akin to the EOS-1.
> I am one of those boring luddites who likes big, heavy cameras and has been using the EOS-1 range since 1987!



That's funny. The EOS-1 wasn't introduced until September of 1989.


----------



## Timedog (May 26, 2020)

This is HUGE.

**J.R. Voice** "Bah gawd, Sony has been broken in half!"

People on the internet will still complain because Sony sensors will still have 0.2 stops better DR at ISO 100.


----------



## unfocused (May 26, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I should imagine that Canon will have an R1 out by the Olympics in 2021


I kind of doubt it. If any camera is going to be delayed by COVID-19, it will probably be the R1, which doesn't really have a market yet. I think Canon will want the R5 out in the field for at least a year in order to get feedback before rushing an R1 into production. Canon may still want the Olympics to be all about the 1Dx III. The Olympics is not the venue to test run a camera so I think they will want to have a thorough vetting of the R1 before taking the risk of putting it out prematurely for the summer Olympics. There are a lot of other sporting events that are less high risk for Canon to use to debut an R1 in 2022. They might actually want to put the R1 on a winter Olympic cycle and keep the 1Dx on the summer schedule.


----------



## 6degrees (May 26, 2020)

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV : $2,499.00
Canon EOS R: $1,799.00
Sony a7iIV: $3,498.

If Canon R5 is above $3500, it will be a tough sell.


----------



## Del Paso (May 26, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Why do people insist on saying this every time a price for anything is mentioned? UK prices are listed inclusive of tax USA prices are not. In the UK the health service is included in your tax bill, in the USA it is not, personally I'd pay a few hundred dollars more each time I bought a camera and got health insurance included, in the USA you 'save' a few hundred dollars on the cost of your camera and spend $500 every single month on health insurance because "Freedom".


Because you are convinced that health insurance in Europe is free ??? 
Many Europeans would happily pay only $500 a month...


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I should imagine that Canon will have an R1 out by the Olympics in 2021



That won't preclude use of the R5, either. If anything, assuming Canon has an R1 out in time for a 2021 Olympics that actually happens, the R1 would be more likely to reduce usage of the 1D X Mark III for some users than to reduce usage of the R5 by other users. My personal opinion is that an R1 out by mid-2021 AND the Olympics actually happening in 2021 are both very big *IFs* at this point in time.


----------



## Darrell Cadieux (May 26, 2020)

It is my hope that it is initially offered with a bonus package as the first R series cameras were, an EF/RF adapter, a bag and an extra battery.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

BillB said:


> I’m not so sure that the R1 will be out that quickly. We will know more when we find out the AF performance of the R5 and how close they are to meeting the standards that an R1 will have to meet.



The AF performance of the 1D X Mark III in Live View is probably a better indicator of the current state of the art for main imaging sensor based AF at Canon. The R5 may or may not match that. Even when the Canon 5-series started using the same PDAF sensors as the concurrent 1-series bodies, the shot-to-shot AF consistency of the 5D Mark III and 5D Mark IV seemed to be just a tick or two off from the 1D X and 1D X Mark II, respectively.

We'll just have to wait and see.


----------



## skullsession (May 26, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> I don't know about that. There are instances when the resolution bump is important for sports people too. The mechanical shutter speed of 12 fps is really the comparison point, as sports shots really do suffer from electronic shutter jello effect. There will be times when 12 fps disadvantage isn't as great as the 20 megapixel disadvantage of the 1d3. Lots will depend on other things, like buffer depth. Still too early to tell.


It can help, but it's way down the list for me, and can be lived without. I've run a lot of deep crops without it. Durability, initial target acquisition, consistency are all much more important.

I've owned 6 1D bodies for sports for myself and other photographers. We've put outrageous quantities of shots on them as sports tournament photographers. Some of them hit well over a million actuations. Only the 1DmkII (non-x) wore out, and that one was heavily used before I got it. In my 1DX/1DX2 bodies, I've never had a shutter replaced sooner than 450k clicks (usually it's longer than that), with one exception, and that was a bad sensor from the factory (which has been spotless since). They only get replaced because they're already at the lab for fixing, and it might be another 200-300k before there's time to send it in.

They've been dropped, exposed to elements, been in all sorts of temps and just keep on ticking. Only failure was a faulty rain gear letting water pool inside and shorting out the LCD screen. Camera still worked great, just had to go semi old school.

I'm more excited for the R6. The 7D2 was a brilliant value, because it gave you 80% of a 1DX for 1/4 (or less) of the price. It also provided a 112-320mm kit that could cover any field sport for about $1400 for second shooters. But it was not capable of great, only good to very good in terms of image quality. The Canon R line, while painfully underpowered for sports, produced a stellar image when it nailed the shot, and locked on crisper than any of my five 7d2's ever have.

Surely there will be some corners/rough spots that the R6 suffers from, or there'd be no reason to buy 1Dx3/R5 (or the eventual R1X). But if it can bring the focus precision of the 7d2 with the mirrorless functionality, I will run to trade in my 7D lineup for those.


I'd love to be surprised, but I highly expect all three to maintain the current classes. And that's perfectly fine with me, because portrait/videographers do not need my battleproof tank, and frankly sports shooters can get by without it. And I'm not about to buy a fleet of them, or the company goes out of business 

But what's exciting is the possibility of actually using the 5R confidently for sports. The frame rate of the 5D was the dealbreaker.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

6degrees said:


> Canon EOS 5D Mark IV : $2,499.00
> Canon EOS R: $1,799.00
> Sony a7iIV: $3,498.
> 
> If Canon R5 is above $3500, it will be a tough sell.



The EOS 5D Mark IV is at the end of a four-plus year sales cycle. It's been less than one year since it began selling from authorized retailers for $2,499. It was introduced at $3,499 USD in 2016, the same as the 5D Mark III was introduced at $3,499 USD in 2012.


----------



## tbintb (May 26, 2020)

I’m curious to know if my 400mm f5.6L, which is not stabilized, will be stabilized on the new R5 body using a Canon adaptor. I’m already excited about the camera, but this would definitely seal the deal for me!


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

tbintb said:


> I’m curious to know if my 400mm f5.6L, which is not stabilized, will be stabilized on the new R5 body using a Canon adaptor. I’m already excited about the camera, but this would definitely seal the deal for me!



The camera's IBIS would likely be functional. Of course the lens itself would still be non-stabilized.


----------



## jedy (May 26, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> Sony killer at that price.


According to Mirrorlessrumors the soon to be announced A7SIII will have a cooling fan and will be a ‘video workhorse’ and likely priced around the same. Until any of these cameras are released it’s very premature to claim ‘Sony Killer’ (I’m guessing Sony will be OK). Personally, I’d like to see what witchcraft Canon has to make the R5 run 8K and 4K 120p fullframe without any fan and a fairly reasonably sized FF body. What will be the record time and how hot will it get? Could the A7SIII run for longer with a cooling fan??


----------



## Richard Anthony (May 26, 2020)

joestopper said:


> " ... it will not win over OVF shooters ... "
> 
> Interesting level of arrogance to make statements on behalf of others. And remarkable level of ignorance to make conclusions before ever seen or tested ...


Why the Sony A9 has


----------



## DrToast (May 26, 2020)

tbintb said:


> I’m curious to know if my 400mm f5.6L, which is not stabilized, will be stabilized on the new R5 body using a Canon adaptor. I’m already excited about the camera, but this would definitely seal the deal for me!



It will probably work somewhat, but lens stabilziation works better for longer focal lengths. But it will be better than nothing.


----------



## edoorn (May 26, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The AF performance of the 1D X Mark III in Live View is probably a better indicator of the current state of the art for main imaging sensor based AF at Canon. The R5 may or may not match that. Even when the Canon 5-series started using the same PDAF sensors as the concurrent 1-series bodies, the shot-to-shot AF consistency of the 5D Mark III and 5D Mark IV seemed to be just a tick or two off from the 1D X and 1D X Mark II, respectively.
> 
> We'll just have to wait and see.


Or maybe it’s better, considering the fact the R5 has eye, body and face detect for both humans and animals.


----------



## tbintb (May 26, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The camera's IBIS would likely be functional. Of course the lens itself would still be non-stabilized.



Thank you for the reply. I didn’t word that correctly in the first place.....I meant would there still be some sort of stabilization such as in-camera, which you said would remain, and makes sense. The idea that this will be the equivalent of having a stabilized lens on the body is a great selling point. Someone else said Canon did it right, and they sure did with their adaptors. Thanks again.


----------



## 6degrees (May 26, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The EOS 5D Mark IV is at the end of a four-plus year sales cycle. It's been less than one year since it began selling from authorized retailers for $2,499. It was introduced at $3,499 USD in 2016, the same as the 5D Mark III was introduced at $3,499 USD in 2012.



Remember how Tesla sells Model 3 and Model Y?


----------



## x4dow (May 26, 2020)

padam said:


> New R5 teaser video in German:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


in video. 35MP is a 8kDCI resolution. You have further vertical resolution for photos in 3:2


----------



## wockawocka (May 26, 2020)

£2400 GBP via grey market then.


----------



## x4dow (May 26, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> £2400 GBP via grey market then.


ahah, grey market usually only has a 10-15% saving at the start. 2-3 months later , about 30% saving. so maybe £3500 imported at start, after 2 months , about £3000.


----------



## tbintb (May 26, 2020)

DrToast said:


> It will probably work somewhat, but lens stabilziation works better for longer focal lengths. But it will be better than nothing.


 Thank you. Someone else mentioned in-body stabilization should remain activated, which makes sense. But that 400mm lens in question is a huge reason why I never even considered switched to another brand while so many people were bashing Canon for their sensors. It’s a great lightweight lens, with great IQ. To think it will now be stabilized in some way has me excited as a kid in a candy store.


----------



## sryan (May 26, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...
> 
> 
> Can you please provide us with just one still shot of the R6? You said you had a video of the camera with an IBIS test but also gave a verbal description of the more curved body. Just one still shot? Thanks.


----------



## 12Broncos (May 26, 2020)

What the heck, July now?!!! I'm tired of waiting for just a bloody announcement. Last I looked an announcement isn't going to get COVID-19, in fact an announcement doesn't care about COVID-19. This is ridiculous!


----------



## RBSfphoto (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Not at all, the R5 is not a sports shooter (from what we know so far), it will not win over OVF shooters (myself included), it is not as rugged as the 1DXIII, it will definitely not be used at the Olympics, etc. The 1D series has always been a specialist camera, which is a niche that the R5 does not fill; pricing is not everything; that's like saying it will render the C200 obsolete just because it is cheaper and on paper has some better video features.


yeah, but the format of the c200 is different. Much like sports shooters, cinematographers have very specific jobs to do and the user experience of the c200 is very different than a hybrid camera. Not that it won't take some of those sales but c200 and 1dXIII are niche products for specific use cases and the 5 line of cameras are much more general-purpose it is not all about specs.


----------



## usern4cr (May 26, 2020)

I've been holding to my guess of the R5 at $2999 to $3499. I'm still going to hope that's what it comes out at, but at least I know it will be very close either way.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

edoorn said:


> Or maybe it’s better, considering the fact the R5 has eye, body and face detect for both humans and animals.



Maybe, but my guess is not by much, if any.

Field reports from those using the 1D X Mark III indicate it does very well with face detect and eye detect for both humans and animals, both in Live View and with OVF based PDAF.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

tbintb said:


> Thank you for the reply. I didn’t word that correctly in the first place.....I meant would there still be some sort of stabilization such as in-camera, which you said would remain, and makes sense. The idea that this will be the equivalent of having a stabilized lens on the body is a great selling point. Someone else said Canon did it right, and they sure did with their adaptors. Thanks again.



Keep in mind that, as Dr. Toast pointed out above, the same amount of sensor movement provides less and less benefit as the focal length increases and the angle of view decreases. Or to put it another way, the same amount of camera movement creates more blur as the focal length increases. SO IBIS will not be nearly as effective at 400mm as it would be at, say, 50mm.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

6degrees said:


> Remember how Tesla sells Model 3 and Model Y?



Nope. They're way out of my price range.


----------



## SpaceGhost1969 (May 26, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> $3999 was my prediction for a long time. Sony killer at that price. Will sell lots of expensive RF lenses.


I think a lot of folks will buy the body yet continue to use the EF glass with an adapter. This will allow folks to get the higher bit rate and image quality but keep that expensive glass that they have invested in over the years. I see this as being the most popular option.


----------



## x4dow (May 26, 2020)

RBSfphoto said:


> yeah, but the format of the c200 is different. Much like sports shooters, cinematographers have very specific jobs to do and the user experience of the c200 is very different than a hybrid camera. Not that it won't take some of those sales but c200 and 1dXIII are niche products for specific use cases and the 5 line of cameras are much more general-purpose it is not all about specs.


this camera will not be better than a c200 for video. Lets not compare 4k60 full sensor readout in raw, vs a line skipped moire mess of 4k120p reading 1/4 of the sensor


----------



## snappy604 (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> I have always found that amusing; people who trash Canon at every turn then go buy an adapter and use nothing but Canon lenses on their Sony bodies. I do think the RF mount hurts Canon as well though, sure there's an adapter but with RF lenses costing more than their EF equivalents, and the fact that the new bodies aren't native to the EF mount; these factors can't help but slow adoption.
> 
> 
> 
> The larger sites yes (especially Amazon), but you might be surprised at how many smaller sites still don't collect taxes. Even B&H didn't collect taxes on my recent purchase. It's really based on the state the company is in, the local laws of that state, and the laws of the state that you reside in.




Ironically I tend to buy Canon bodies and 3rd party lenses like Sigma


----------



## 6degrees (May 26, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Nope. They're way out of my price range.



Some people even said Model 3 and Model Y are sold below the cost. But watch how Tesla kills competitors.

I would think Canon R5 price above $3500 is "more expensive" than Model 3 or Model Y. Because more people are willing to buy Model 3 or Model Y than spending $3500+ on Canon R5, including me.


----------



## 12Broncos (May 26, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Not at all, the R5 is not a sports shooter (from what we know so far), it will not win over OVF shooters (myself included), it is not as rugged as the 1DXIII, it will definitely not be used at the Olympics, etc. The 1D series has always been a specialist camera which is a niche that the R5 does not fill; pricing is not everything; that's like saying it will render the C200 obsolete just because it is cheaper and on paper has some better video features.
> [/QUOTE
> That's odd, I heard it was going to have weathersealing, and be a wildlife photographer's dream. I'm not saying you're wrong, no offense, but I hope you are.


----------



## elcapitan (May 26, 2020)

I kinda feel like someone at Canon leaked this to get reactions so they can settle on a price that captures the unprecedented demand while also making as much as they can. (Which is understandable, I guess.)

That said, I'll be happy if it's under $4k. $3500 was expected for me, and I'd still buy it at $3999, but with tax and just an extra battery that's already pretty close to $4,500, so it'd probably limit my ability to get much else.


----------



## Caseydull (May 26, 2020)

Fbimages said:


> Now is a good time to stock up on CF express cards. ProGrade run a sale until the end of May with -25% on all products


How do you get 25% off?? I don’t see that discount.


----------



## SteveC (May 26, 2020)

Treyarnon said:


> R5 needs to significantly below 4k in my opinion. (just sayin')
> 
> 
> Its experience.
> ...



This is why I think we should just quote things in kwatloos.

1 kwatloo equals 1 USD equals 1 GBP equals 1 Euro. Seems to work out that way, anyhow.


----------



## sanj (May 26, 2020)

Will it shoot 6k RAW? That will be great for me if it did.


----------



## tpatana (May 26, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The AF performance of the 1D X Mark III in Live View is probably a better indicator of the current state of the art for main imaging sensor based AF at Canon. The R5 may or may not match that. Even when the Canon 5-series started using the same PDAF sensors as the concurrent 1-series bodies, the shot-to-shot AF consistency of the 5D Mark III and 5D Mark IV seemed to be just a tick or two off from the 1D X and 1D X Mark II, respectively.
> 
> We'll just have to wait and see.



Agreed, sometimes I shoot sports with 5D4 and 1DX (1), and 1DX has better tracking for indoor sports.


----------



## wockawocka (May 26, 2020)

x4dow said:


> ahah, grey market usually only has a 10-15% saving at the start. 2-3 months later , about 30% saving. so maybe £3500 imported at start, after 2 months , about £3000.



In the case of the 5D mkiv I got in on a group buy (official UK retailer) which was £2400. £1000 off the RRP and being VAT registered at the time it cost me 2k a body. E-infin were selling them at £2695 for the first month or so then it went down to £2400(ish). I remember it fairly well as it was the first time I managed to find a UK sourced camera cheaper than import.

Canon makes a LOT on their bodies in the UK.


----------



## R1-7D (May 26, 2020)

Wait, so the announcement is coming in July now and not June?

Man, the wait never ends!


----------



## dwarven (May 26, 2020)

melgross said:


> Well, that’s something. I don’t expect that anyone here believed it would be more.


There were plenty of wild overestimations lol.


----------



## 12Broncos (May 26, 2020)

sanj said:


> Sometimes if feels good to say "I knew it!" And I still think it will be $3699


I like that estimate, however, go up another hundred.


----------



## TAF (May 26, 2020)

elcapitan said:


> I kinda feel like someone at Canon leaked this to get reactions so they can settle on a price that captures the unprecedented demand while also making as much as they can. (Which is understandable, I guess.)
> 
> That said, I'll be happy if it's under $4k. $3500 was expected for me, and I'd still buy it at $3999, but with tax and just an extra battery that's already pretty close to $4,500, so it'd probably limit my ability to get much else.



If you’re right...then $3999 is clearly too much and it darn well ought to be $3499 or less.

Hear that Canon? Cheaper is better!


----------



## privatebydesign (May 26, 2020)

Treyarnon said:


> R5 needs to significantly below 4k in my opinion. (just sayin')
> 
> 
> Its experience.
> ...


Dude, I’m English! Of course you can’t say a % of a purchase price goes to the NHS but by the same token you have to accept the more generous social programs in most developed countries are paid for via direct and indirect taxation of which a sales tax is an important part in many countries the UK included.

Oh by the way, the UK has a higher minimum wage £ to the US$, £8.72 vs $7.25.


----------



## definedphotography (May 26, 2020)

sanj said:


> Will it shoot 6k RAW? That will be great for me if it did.



Not sure on 6K, but it does 8K raw. How long it will record for, no one (publicly) knows.


----------



## BillB (May 26, 2020)

elcapitan said:


> I kinda feel like someone at Canon leaked this to get reactions so they can settle on a price that captures the unprecedented demand while also making as much as they can. (Which is understandable, I guess.)



I don’t think that this leak is going to have much impact in the price that a Canon sets for the R5.


----------



## SteveC (May 26, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Dude, I’m English! Of course you can’t say a % of a purchase price goes to the NHS but by the same token you have to accept the more generous social programs in most developed countries are paid for via direct and indirect taxation of which a sales tax is an important part in many countries the UK included.
> 
> Oh by the way, the UK has a higher minimum wage £ to the US$, £8.72 vs $7.25.



in 29 US states, there is a local law making it higher than $7.25. Just from eyeballing a bar graph, there are at least 15 states with a wage over $8.50, and they probably cover more than half of our population.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

6degrees said:


> Some people even said Model 3 and Model Y are sold below the cost. But watch how Tesla kills competitors.
> 
> I would think Canon R5 price above $3500 is "more expensive" than Model 3 or Model Y. Because more people are willing to buy Model 3 or Model Y than spending $3500+ on Canon R5, including me.



Tesla has spent more money than it has made every quarter of its existence.


----------



## gbc (May 26, 2020)

I've been saving up for the camera body, but this may be the first time I'm tempted to buy a body and lens kit. Wanna get some of that sweet RF glass...


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

12Broncos said:


> That's odd, I heard it was going to have weathersealing, and be a wildlife photographer's dream. I'm not saying you're wrong, no offense, but I hope you are.



All cameras have "weather sealing" to one degree or another. But if you read the warranty of any of them, water damage is specifically NOT covered for any of Canon's (or Nikons, or Sony's, etc.) interchangeable lens cameras.

Some bodies are "more" weather resistant" than others. Some are a little less or far less weather resistant than others.

The EOS 1-series has always been regarded as "more" weather resistant than other models in the EOS lineup. The 5D Mark IV and the 7D Mark II, though, are not that far below the 1D X Mark II.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 26, 2020)

SteveC said:


> in 29 US states, there is a local law making it higher than $7.25. Just from eyeballing a bar graph, there are at least 15 states with a wage over $8.50, and they probably cover more than half of our population.


And there are millions of people who work under the minimum wage because of the disgusting Minimum Tipped Wage rule where states can set the minimum wage as low as $3.89 and corporations can pool take the money left by patrons as tips to redistribute do whatever they want with.


----------



## gmon750 (May 26, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Why do people insist on saying this every time a price for anything is mentioned? UK prices are listed inclusive of tax USA prices are not. In the UK the health service is included in your tax bill, in the USA it is not, personally I'd pay a few hundred dollars more each time I bought a camera and got health insurance included, in the USA you 'save' a few hundred dollars on the cost of your camera and spend $500 every single month on health insurance because "Freedom".



Some states/businesses in the U.S. don't charge sales tax. Many people buying these cameras also have jobs which includes health insurance. This is about cameras, not political policies.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 26, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> Some states/businesses in the U.S. don't charge sales tax. Many people buying these cameras also have jobs which includes health insurance. This is about cameras, not political policies.


I didn’t start it, I merely presented a counterpoint to an oft used fallacy.


----------



## gmon750 (May 26, 2020)

Being that the R5 is considered the mirrorless version of the 5D, if those specs translate to real-world use, then I'm looking forward to finally retiring my 5DM3 as soon as an appropriate underwater housing becomes available.


----------



## slclick (May 26, 2020)

Ok Ok...a very large group says it's going to be EXPENSIVE! They list the video features etc. Then there's another large group that says video features don't drive up the cost. In a Venn diagram there is a pretty sizable overlap here on CR with those two groups. 

Me, I'm not even in a circle because I'm not buying one. I do hope it's on the lower end of pricing for all my still comrades out there. (Or priced super high for the video nuts?)


----------



## Jasonmc89 (May 26, 2020)

That’s genuinely a lot of camera for that price!

What do you guys think a 1 series mirrorless body could offer over this? Apart from a bump in speed and focus performance it’s hard to imagine a body providing much more really.


----------



## Joules (May 26, 2020)

Jasonmc89 said:


> That’s genuinely a lot of camera for that price!
> 
> What do you guys think a 1 series mirrorless body could offer over this? Apart from a bump in speed and focus performance it’s hard to imagine a body providing much more really.


A 1 series R camera could have 1 series features.

Vertical grip with better batteries, better controls like that fancy optical AF button/controller, matching card slots, buffer depth, better weather sealing, faster mechanical shutter (20 FPS in the 1DX III, 'only' 12 in the R5), connectivity, GPS (Unless the R5 also gets that), better video profiles, ...


----------



## x4dow (May 26, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> In the case of the 5D mkiv I got in on a group buy (official UK retailer) which was £2400. £1000 off the RRP and being VAT registered at the time it cost me 2k a body. E-infin were selling them at £2695 for the first month or so then it went down to £2400(ish). I remember it fairly well as it was the first time I managed to find a UK sourced camera cheaper than import.
> 
> Canon makes a LOT on their bodies in the UK.


vat registered is another matter. I remember buying A6300 cheaper on amazon prime day deal + sony cashback than imported costed. i think was a6300+ kit lens for like 399 after all deals


----------



## x4dow (May 26, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Dude, I’m English! Of course you can’t say a % of a purchase price goes to the NHS but by the same token you have to accept the more generous social programs in most developed countries are paid for via direct and indirect taxation of which a sales tax is an important part in many countries the UK included.
> 
> Oh by the way, the UK has a higher minimum wage £ to the US$, £8.72 vs $7.25.


minimum wage jobs in the US get 5times+ their wage in tips


----------



## AEWest (May 26, 2020)

slclick said:


> Ok Ok...a very large group says it's going to be EXPENSIVE! They list the video features etc. Then there's another large group that says video features don't drive up the cost. In a Venn diagram there is a pretty sizable overlap here on CR with those two groups.
> 
> Me, I'm not even in a circle because I'm not buying one. I do hope it's on the lower end of pricing for all my still comrades out there. (Or priced super high for the video nuts?)


Maybe the purchaser should sign a statutory declaration confirming camera will only be used for stills and the price will be $2999 otherwise price is $4599..


----------



## navastronia (May 26, 2020)

Joules said:


> A 1 series R camera could have 1 series features.
> 
> Vertical grip with better batteries, better controls like that fancy optical AF button/controller, matching card slots, buffer depth, better weather sealing, faster mechanical shutter (20 FPS in the 1DX III, 'only' 12 in the R5), connectivity, GPS (Unless the R5 also gets that), better video profiles, ...



Personally, I can't see myself buying another (new) camera without a built-in vertical grip. I shoot a lot of portraits and find being able to take photos easily in that orientation indispensable.

Because I won't be able to personally afford it for some time, I wouldn't mind a 2-year wait on the 1-series R


----------



## slclick (May 26, 2020)

AEWest said:


> Maybe the purchaser should sign a statutory declaration confirming camera will only be used for stills and the price will be $2999 otherwise price is $4599..


I like the ala carte Lego idea more. Go online to Canon and start checking/unchecking radio buttons.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

SteveC said:


> in 29 US states, there is a local law making it higher than $7.25. Just from eyeballing a bar graph, there are at least 15 states with a wage over $8.50, and they probably cover more than half of our population.



Consider the following:

State - Population as a percentage of U.S. - Minimum wage

States with $8.70/hr or higher minimum wage:

California - 11.9%- $12.00/hr ($13.00/hr for employers with more than 25 employees, some local areas are higher)
New York - 5.8% - $11.80/hr (Some local areas, including NYC at $15.00/hr with slightly less than half the state's entire population, are higher)
Florida - 6.6% - $8.56/hr
Illinois - 3.7% - $9.25/hr
Ohio - 3.4% - $8.70/hr
Michigan - 3% - $9.65/hr
New Jersey - 2.6% - $11.00/hr
Washington - 2.3% - $13.50/hr
Arizona - 2.2% - $12.00/hr
Massachusetts - 2.1% - $12.75/hr
Missouri - 1.9% - $9.45/hr
Maryland - 1.8% - $11.00/hr
Colorado - 1.8% - $12.00/hr
Oregon - 1.3% - $11.25/hr (some local areas are higher)
Connecticut - 1.1% - $11.00/hr (goes to $12.00 on September 1, 2020)
Arkansas - .9% - $10.00/hr
New Mexico - .6% - $9.00/hr
Nebraska- .6% - $9.00/hr
West Virginia - .5% - $8.75/hr
Hawaii - .4% - $10.10/hr
Maine - .4% - $12.00/hr
Montana - .3% - $8.65/hr
Rhode Island - .3% - $10.50
Delaware - .3% - $9.25
South Dakota - .3% - $9.30/hr
Alaska - .2% - $10.15/hr
DC - .2% - $14.00/hr (scheduled to go to $15.00/hr on July 1, 2020)
Vermont - .2% - $10.96/hr

Those states have 56.7% of the U.S. population.
33.7% of the U.S. population live in states with a minimum wage of $10.00/hr or more.

Additionally:

Minnesota - 1.7% - $8.15/hr ($10.00/hr for large employers)
Nevada - .9% - $7.25/hr if employer provides health insurance, $8.25/hr if not. (Scheduled to go up to $8.00/$9.00 on July 1, 2020)

Only 40.7% of the U.S. population lives in states where the federal minimum wage of $7.25/hr applies.


----------



## Steve Balcombe (May 26, 2020)

This is no surprise, since Canon has publicly stated that the R5 is 5D class. A mirrorless equivalent could in theory cost a little less than a DSLR, so I'm still hoping for a bit less than £3.5k. But what is more important to me - and very few people have raised this point - is the combined price of the R5 and the RF 100-500, because I won't be buying one without the other.

BTW apologies for the on-topic post.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (May 26, 2020)

About $5500 CDN as expected. I will be pre-ordering on day one.

I plan on keeping my R and RP at least for now as I have really enjoyed both Cameras.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (May 26, 2020)

New R5 post! Let’s read the comments!

(Skip a couple of pages..)

wtf?


----------



## Joules (May 26, 2020)

Steve Balcombe said:


> This is no surprise


Well, enough people must be surprised by this, since it warranted a post about it. Seriously though, in other news the sky is blue. But people thought Canon would charge 1D type money for the R5. 



Steve Balcombe said:


> BTW apologies for the on-topic post.


How dare you


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> And there are millions of people who work under the minimum wage because of the disgusting Minimum Tipped Wage rule where states can set the minimum wage as low as $3.89 and corporations can pool take the money left by patrons as tips to redistribute do whatever they want with.



They also have to make up the difference if the employee doesn't net $7.25/hr after tips.


----------



## David_E (May 26, 2020)

PhotoRN86 said:


> ..._you sir_... [sic]


Feel free to express your opinion of me, but please don't use pompous phraseology in doing so. "You" suffices these days. If you must use pompous language, at least capitalize and punctuate properly. _You, sir_, ...


----------



## Michael Clark (May 26, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> Some states/businesses in the U.S. don't charge sales tax. Many people buying these cameras also have jobs which includes health insurance. This is about cameras, not political policies.



Only Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, and Oregon have no state sales tax. That covers only 2.54% of the U.S. population.


----------



## PhotoRN86 (May 26, 2020)

2 months ago a thief broke into my car the day I was moving and stole my 5D mkIII, 4 EF Canon L lenses, and my macbook pro.... I was crushed, but after my insurance covered the COMPLETE cost of all those items from when I bought them, I almost want to thank that thief because of him I'm able to use that money to be able to jump to the RF system and lenses fresh and not feel guilty about having EF lenses. In the past I wanted to switch to sony but my EF lenses kept me from doing that, and I'm glad that they did and so the hardest thing for me right now is waiting for the R5 to come out, Now I've bought 3 RF lenses and have no camera to put it on so seeing the Eos R5 being priced under 4k will make everything fit what insurance gave me after my theft... I hated that thief 2 months ago, but now I almost wanna thank him.


----------



## Whowe (May 26, 2020)

Joules said:


> A 1 series R camera could have 1 series features.
> 
> Vertical grip with better batteries, better controls like that fancy optical AF button/controller, matching card slots, buffer depth, better weather sealing, faster mechanical shutter (20 FPS in the 1DX III, 'only' 12 in the R5), connectivity, GPS (Unless the R5 also gets that), better video profiles, ...


I see the R1 simply as the 1DXiii with new flange, move sensor closer to flange and add IBIS, replace OVF with electronic, upgrade wifi to 5G like R5, and include video specs and codecs of r5. Same body. controls, etc. 

I would think a pretty easy upgrade.


----------



## Whowe (May 26, 2020)

x4dow said:


> minimum wage jobs in the US get 5times+ their wage in tips


Really? That high of tips working at McDonalds....


----------



## CANNOT (May 26, 2020)

Nah fam. That Cannot be true; I highly doubt it.

When that one Aussie retailer put it up for around equivalent of $6k I was like 'yeah, that about right'. This thing is a menacing beast. BEAST. To put it in the price bracked of the S1H or A9 II seems an insult and silly for what it is.

To me the R5 on paper seems a spiritual successor to the 1D C that was all about video as well and that one wasn't even a grain as exciting as this, yet matched it price at launch to the then announced as well C300 which was a whopping $14999 people! The C300 Mark III got released for $10999, so that's a trend: more/better for less. I'm down for that. Obviously the R5 is less of a production machine, but heck is it capable! Again, I can't see this coming in at Panasonic or Sony mirrorless flagship pricing. It dwarfs them by a considerable amount (and I'd consider myself more of a Panasonic fanboii than a Canon one; it's not about the brand though, it's about value for money regardless of what badge is on a camera!).

So, yes... matching the C300 Mark III with $10999, seems well, silly, there's a market for the camera but they won't be selling like hotcakes when it's that much. But I consider $4k (which is a lot, don't get me wrong) to be relatively cheap... too cheap, I can't imagine they'd do it (if they do: respect!). So what I was thinking, if this is the spiritual 1D C successor, that makes this a very high-end specific niche camera. What else is a modern very high-end specific niche camera? Well, the Nikon D6 for example. And that's around $6499. So, that's my ballpark figure, $5999-6999. I'd really be suprised if it would come in at $3999 tbh.

But I mean, could be a tactic. Reduce the price = sell more = same profit; more or less. But with more sales comes more people drawn into your brand and ecosystem = boosted lenses/accessories sales. More of them in the wild & wow-ed customers = free advertisement. So that could as well be their approach. One thing's for sure: we'll see!


----------



## 6degrees (May 26, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Tesla has spent more money than it has made every quarter of its existence.



Many years ago, people said same thing to amazon. Now amazon is like a public enemy and will kill all competitors.


----------



## SteveC (May 26, 2020)

Whowe said:


> Really? That high of tips working at McDonalds....



McDonalds would have to pay the regular minimum wage since patrons aren't expected to tip.


----------



## slclick (May 26, 2020)

David_E said:


> Feel free to express your opinion of me, but please don't use pompous phraseology in doing so. "You" suffices these days. If you must use pompous language, at least capitalize and punctuate properly. _You, sir_, ...


I hate that too, then there's the "I know you are smarter than that my friend...." Not that anyone ever said it to me of course.


----------



## [email protected] (May 26, 2020)

skullsession said:


> It can help, but it's way down the list for me, and can be lived without. I've run a lot of deep crops without it. Durability, initial target acquisition, consistency are all much more important.
> 
> I've owned 6 1D bodies for sports for myself and other photographers. We've put outrageous quantities of shots on them as sports tournament photographers. Some of them hit well over a million actuations. Only the 1DmkII (non-x) wore out, and that one was heavily used before I got it. In my 1DX/1DX2 bodies, I've never had a shutter replaced sooner than 450k clicks (usually it's longer than that), with one exception, and that was a bad sensor from the factory (which has been spotless since). They only get replaced because they're already at the lab for fixing, and it might be another 200-300k before there's time to send it in.
> 
> ...



All good points. Just want to mention that I would run around with a 1DX and a five series camera quite frequently. It was often too much to carry two of my one series cameras at the same time. And in all that running and gunning, I never saw the five series camera suffer any sort of physical damage that the one DX wouldn’t have taken in a similar fashion. In other words, I think that the one DX is a very impressive build, but the five series never really showed any more vulnerability. It’s really shameful what I put those cameras through. I suspect the new five camera will be similarly built.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 27, 2020)

magarity said:


> In the US, some people spend a lot on individual health care insurance because "payroll taxes". Back when income tax and payroll deductions were introduced, employer provided health insurance was decreed not to be income and thus not taxable. So employers were thus encouraged to provide it as a way to attract employees. From there it just spread wildly. The unintended side effect was that small / self employers have higher costs. Disparate costs leads into a whole different can of worms centered mainly around health care providers' severely dysfunctional opaque pricing and discounting. "Freedom" doesn't really have much to do with it compared to tax accounting.


And travel insurance to the US cost double what the costs are to any other (or multiple) countries - which is probably because they don't get these "discounts". The list price for health care items are ridiculous but only so providers can be given bigger discount %.
Australia has Medicare for all people but private health insurance is also common (choice of doctor, no or little waiting lists, dental insurance etc). Private health insurance generally also has co-payments as the most doctors charge over the "scheduled fee" which the governement hasn't changed in years. The government actually has an additional income tax surcharge if you earn over a certain amount and don't have private health cover.


----------



## gmon750 (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Only Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, and Oregon have no state sales tax. That covers only 2.54% of the U.S. population.



So what? I'm in CA and I've ordered Camera equipment (and computers) from sites like Adorama in NY which sold it to me sans sales tax. What's your point?


----------



## David - Sydney (May 27, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> Being that the R5 is considered the mirrorless version of the 5D, if those specs translate to real-world use, then I'm looking forward to finally retiring my 5DM3 as soon as an appropriate underwater housing becomes available.


Luckily my Ikelite housing fits 5Diii/iv/SR so upgrading from iii to second hand iv meant I didn't need a new housing. That said, I will be moving to a new R5 Ikelite housing when it is available.
Touch screen is great especially for moving the focus point but no use underwater. The Ikelite housing doesn't support joystick movement so it will be interesting to see how tracking works without these 2 options. IBIS + IS stabilization will be very welcome!
Second hand housings aren't worth much though unfortunately :-(


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> B&H has been charging sales tax on my purchases at least since the beginning of 2019. (Ditto for amazon, adorama, and most other non-camera related online retailers that aren't fly-by-night operations trying to fly beneath the radar.)



Like I said..it depends on your state, the laws of your state and where the vendor is located. I spent over $10K in the last few weeks at B&H rigging a C200 and did not get charged sales tax on any of it. By your own admission and by anyone's standards B&H is not a fly by night operation. Even Amazon is hit or miss for me, and Amazon even has several warehouses in my state. They are more consistent lately with charging sales tax but definitely not 100% of the time, I think even on Amazon it still depends on where the vendor is located if it is fulfilled by Prime, etc.


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

snappy604 said:


> Ironically I tend to buy Canon bodies and 3rd party lenses like Sigma


My only non Canon lens for my 5DIV is actually a Sigma 50mm because every test I saw said the Sigma 50mm outperformed the Canon so I'm right there with you.


----------



## dkingentertainment (May 27, 2020)

OK CAN WE SEE SOME FOOTAGE WITH ALL THIS HYPE


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> It definitely will be used at the Olympics, assuming they actually happen in 2021. Not every photo assignment at an event like the Olympics involves shooting sports action with big whites from long distances. There are also a lot of human interest stories to be covered. Athletes enjoying the night life in the host communities. Families and friends of athletes who made the long journey to watch and support their loved one. What it's like to live in the athlete's village for a few weeks. How hosting an Olympic event affects the lives of the local residents. Ect.




I overgeneralized a bit...my point was the R5 is not going to fill the niche space that the 1DX fills meaning big whites, fast action, long distances. It is also unlikely to win over die hard OVF shooters who aren't fans of the EVF; in fast moving sports EVF lag is a real concern. Obviously 5Ds have probably been at every Olympics and rightly so, but the 1DX exists for a niche that the 5D was never meant to fill.


----------



## brad-man (May 27, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Like I said..it depends on your state, the laws of your state and where the vendor is located. I spent over $10K in the last few weeks at B&H rigging a C200 and did not get charged sales tax on any of it. By your own admission and by anyone's standards B&H is not a fly by night operation. Even Amazon is hit or miss for me, and Amazon even has several warehouses in my state. They are more consistent lately with charging sales tax but definitely not 100% of the time, I think even on Amazon it still depends on where the vendor is located if it is fulfilled by Prime, etc.


If you buy from Amazon, you will pay sales tax. There are many vendors that sell on Amazon and Amazon "fulfills" the order. In this case there is no sales tax. Unfortunately you also run the risk of counterfeit goods.


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Not all sport shooter use a 1Dx device. If one has ever been to a sporting event on regular basis or a Track & field event, as I'm a coach myself, they would certainly see many a journalist wih 5Dm3s and 5Dmk4 units. The 1Dx may be the device that Canon has advertised as THE sports shooters camera. However it is NOT the only camera. By any means. Simply look at the images on the journalist and "sports shooters" posting. You would be surprised. I never took a 1Dx out on the track or pitch. Why? Because shooting images are just one part of the task. Track and Field meets last ALL flipin day and during the Olympics for few weeks. Prelims, finals etc. Never wanted to be tied down to that tank when leaving the venues. Or having to return directly to the hotel. It's a large item to be lugging around especially when we were in Rio de janeiro. There was very little that one needed at a competition that the 5d couldn't do. Nada. My athlete runs the 110m hurdles. Never had any problem and got images that many photogs with 1Dx's drooled over. Because I know the competition that I'm shooting. Most sporting events have predictable movements. There's a lot one can do with 8k frame grab also.



Any camera can be a sports shooter; you can use a cell phone to film track and field. In fact the most popular camera at any sporting event has been the cell phone camera for many years now. My post was in reply to someone who said the R5 will make the 1DXIII obsolete. My point was the 1DX fills a niche (fast action, long distances, long whites) that the R5 does not fill and is not meant to fill. Just like Canon's Cinema series cameras fills a niche that the R5 was not meant to fill. I could say the R5 is not a Cinematic camera; does that mean you cannot shoot an entire feature film on it? No, it simply means that it was not designed to do so.


----------



## chasingrealness (May 27, 2020)

Sounds right in line with the 5d lineup pricing. Pretty incredible that Canon is going so hard for this price.


----------



## CanoKnight (May 27, 2020)

The3o5FlyGuy said:


> more like, $3999.98


3999.97 or 3997.00 on Amazon


----------



## CanoKnight (May 27, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> $3999 was my prediction for a long time. Sony killer at that price. Will sell lots of expensive RF lenses.



This is not a Sony killer. Exactly what Sony model is it going to kill ? Sony has nothing comparable. This is aimed at the Panasonic S1H, also $4000 , which is taking the Indie/ Netflix market by storm.


----------



## PhotoRN86 (May 27, 2020)

David_E said:


> Feel free to express your opinion of me, but please don't use pompous phraseology in doing so. "You" suffices these days. If you must use pompous language, at least capitalize and punctuate properly. _You, sir_, ...



I think those errors were definitely worth seeing others agree with my post about your behavior on here . I'll let you enjoy your small whip back at me, while I get to enjoy seeing how many people could see how you really are on these forums, I'm going to continue on enjoying all this R5 news, feel free to troll others more, it'll definitely prove my point even further


----------



## illadvisedhammer (May 27, 2020)

I know people seem very excited that it's under $4K usd, but how much will it be nw?


----------



## canonmike (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If you are buying from an authorized seller instead of grey market, not paying sales tax is becoming rarer and rarer as various states pass legislation that allows them to require out of state sellers to collect sales tax on items shipped to their state. This has really taken off since a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision ruled in favor of such states. B&H, Adorama, Amazon, etc. all now charge me 8% sales tax on all online purchases, even though none of them have a physical presence in my home state.


Yes, this kind of levels the playing field for local photograhic vendors, if you can find one and gets me less excited about now ordering anything on Ebay, Amazon, Adorama, etc. etc.


----------



## canonmike (May 27, 2020)

tbintb said:


> I’m curious to know if my 400mm f5.6L, which is not stabilized, will be stabilized on the new R5 body using a Canon adaptor. I’m already excited about the camera, but this would definitely seal the deal for me!


Interesting thought, not only for the 400mm you mention but for all the non IS EF lenses.


----------



## canonmike (May 27, 2020)

12Broncos said:


> What the heck, July now?!!! I'm tired of waiting for just a bloody announcement. Last I looked an announcement isn't going to get COVID-19, in fact an announcement doesn't care about COVID-19. This is ridiculous!


My guess here is that, given all the R5 hype, Canon wants to be able to have adequate supplies of same, once they do start shipping, to avoid angry outbursts among the Canon user community. Given Covid 19 circumstances, who knows what their current manufacturing capabilities are. We've been waiting awhile now for this camera, so let's see if we can just be patient a little longer. In the meantime, I think we all have some Canon gear laying around that still takes wonderful photos.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 27, 2020)

6degrees said:


> Many years ago, people said same thing to amazon. Now amazon is like a public enemy and will kill all competitors.



For every one amazon, there are dozens, if not hundreds of DeLoreans, Solyndras, and other well publicized and massively financed startups that never turned the corner.


----------



## bergstrom (May 27, 2020)

I'm only thinking of buying an eos r now, so it wil be about 4 years before i even think about an r5.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 27, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> So what? I'm in CA and I've ordered Camera equipment (and computers) from sites like Adorama in NY which sold it to me sans sales tax. What's your point?



In the past everyone who didn't live in NY state didn't have to pay sales tax when buying from Adorama. Not so any more. Since a landmark Supreme Court decision in 2018 almost 40 states have passed legislation requiring out of state sellers to collect sales tax on sales shipped to those states. If California hasn't done so already, it's just a matter of time.

When's the last time you bought anything from Adorama and weren't charged sales tax?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (May 27, 2020)

slclick said:


> I like the ala carte Lego idea more. Go online to Canon and start checking/unchecking radio buttons.



It's done differently these days. Subscription model is the way to go. For say $3000 you buy basic features, then you pay $15 a month for 8K video, $5 for animal eye tracking, $7 to unlock 14-bit still raw, $1 to enable the disable option for menu sounds etc. etc.


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It's done differently these days. Subscription model is the way to go. For say $3000 you buy basic features, then you pay $15 a month for 8K video, $5 for animal eye tracking, $7 to unlock 14-bit still raw, $1 to enable the disable option for menu sounds etc. etc.



That sounds pretty horrible and would make me leave Canon for good. Adobe did that with Premier Pro and thanks to Adobe I discovered a far superior NLE called DaVinci Resolve; I guess I should actually thank Adobe for that one. Panasonic tried that with V-Log and eventually gave up and started including it with the GH5s



bergstrom said:


> I'm only thinking of buying an eos r now, so it wil be about 4 years before i even think about an r5.



I would wait and see the full R6 specs, for me the EOS R's single card slot and fn bar made it a non-starter. If the R6 has a variant of the 1DXIII's sensor it's going to be a beast at a very attractive price point. I also feel like there may be something on the way that will fill the odd resolution gap between the R5 and R6, I like to think of it as the R7 or R8.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 27, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Like I said..it depends on your state, the laws of your state and where the vendor is located. I spent over $10K in the last few weeks at B&H rigging a C200 and did not get charged sales tax on any of it. By your own admission and by anyone's standards B&H is not a fly by night operation. Even Amazon is hit or miss for me, and Amazon even has several warehouses in my state. They are more consistent lately with charging sales tax but definitely not 100% of the time, I think even on Amazon it still depends on where the vendor is located if it is fulfilled by Prime, etc.



If you used B&H's Payboo card to purchase all of that stuff, they charged you sales tax and then gave you a rebate for the exact same amount. They also had to pay that tax to your state (or will with the next monthly or quarterly report). Or you may well be in one of the few remaining states that do not require online sellers to collect sales tax for them, or maybe even in one of the few states that don't have sales tax. In either case, you are now in the minority of the total U.S. population.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 27, 2020)

canonmike said:


> Yes, this kind of levels the playing field for local photograhic vendors, if you can find one and gets me less excited about now ordering anything on Ebay, Amazon, Adorama, etc. etc.



Brick and mortars still have overhead that the big online sellers do not. Sure, B&H has that huge store in Manhattan, but only a tiny fraction of what they sell moves through there. Most of it is received from vendors and shipped to buyers from warehouses in central New Jersey.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 27, 2020)

brad-man said:


> If you buy from Amazon, you will pay sales tax. There are many vendors that sell on Amazon and Amazon "fulfills" the order. In this case there is no sales tax. Unfortunately you also run the risk of counterfeit goods.



I got a fake B+W XS-PRO MRC nano HTC C-Pol KSM buying directly from amazon last summer. Amazon no longer keeps their third party vendor products separate from what they sell themselves. If a third-party vendor has a product I ordered directly from amazon sitting in a warehouse closer than where amazon's own stock is located, they'll ship me the one the third party vendor placed in amazon's nearest warehouse and then relist one of the ones from amazon's own stock in a more distant warehouse as belong to the third party vendor.

I sent it back, got all of my money back, and ordered one from B&H. The sad part is I liked the results from the fake one better than the authentic one I got from B&H!


----------



## Eclipsed (May 27, 2020)

CanoKnight said:


> This is not a Sony killer. Exactly what Sony model is it going to kill ? Sony has nothing comparable.



it will win those who want nearly as fast as the 7 and nearly as hi res as the 9. It avoids the hard choice by offering both.


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> You have to sign up for their Payboo credit card to receive a credit for the tax amount. Make sure you pay off the card before the due date because the annual interest rate is around 26%.



No you don't, as I mentioned before it depends on the state you live in and how far along the state you live in is in mandating sales tax for online purchases. They did not charge me sales tax and I did not use their credit card and I built a C200 rig over the last two weeks using B&H.


----------



## Eclipsed (May 27, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> So what? I'm in CA and I've ordered Camera equipment (and computers) from sites like Adorama in NY which sold it to me sans sales tax. What's your point?


Those days are gone, sadly.


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

joestopper said:


> " ... it will not win over OVF shooters ... "
> 
> Interesting level of arrogance to make statements on behalf of others. And remarkable level of ignorance to make conclusions before ever seen or tested ...



Clearly understanding context in a discussion is something you should probably work on. But since you obviously missed the context of the statement I'll break it down for you:

Statement from "Uneternal"

_Thats would be a bold move of Canon cause it basically renders the 1DX3 obsolete._

Reply from myself

_Not at all, the R5 is not a sports shooter (from what we know so far), it will not win over OVF shooters (myself included), it is not as rugged as the 1DXIII, it will definitely not be used at the Olympics, etc. The 1D series has always been a specialist camera which is a niche that the R5 does not fill; pricing is not everything; that's like saying it will render the C200 obsolete just because it is cheaper and on paper has some better video features._

Context

The IDX3 is obsolete because of the release of the R5

Response

It is not going to render it obsolete because:


It does not have the sports shooter features of the 1DXIII
It is not designed to have the speed of the OVF of the 1DXIII
It is not as rugged as the 1DXIII
It is not being marketed as a 1DXIII replacement (as per Canon's own release materials)
Conclusion

The R5 is not going to render the 1DXIII obsolete because the 1DXIII is a niche camera that meets the needs of shooters that shoot with the 1DXIII.

Summary

Is that clear enough for you? What part of that dialogue is arrogant or makes conclusions that are not based on facts that have already been released? The good news is that you are not alone, apparently others also simply looked at the response and failed to consider the context of the response; a skill that I thought was taught sometime around the 5th grade.


----------



## Eclipsed (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Keep in mind that, as Dr. Toast pointed out above, the same amount of sensor movement provides less and less benefit as the focal length increases and the angle of view decreases. Or to put it another way, the same amount of camera movement creates more blur as the focal length increases. SO IBIS will not be nearly as effective at 400mm as it would be at, say, 50mm.


I wonder if it’s more of a threshold issue. If the sensor shift rate can keep up with the lens shake rate then it’s fine. The Nikon Z6 did great with a heavy handheld 400mm non-VR.


----------



## Matthew19 (May 27, 2020)

Remember this is a video centric camera. The video features are on par and beyond the 1dxIII,


----------



## Michael Clark (May 27, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> I wonder if it’s more of a threshold issue. If the sensor shift rate can keep up with the lens shake rate then it’s fine. The Nikon Z6 did great with a heavy handheld 400mm non-VR.



It also depends on the limit of the sensor's movement. The same IBIS system runs out of room with one-eighth as much camera movement in the same direction with a 400mm lens as it would with a 50mm lens. Giving the sensor more range of movement does no good, either. It would then move outside the lens' image circle. The same IBIS system must also be able to move eight times as fast to give the same amount of compensation for a 400mm lens as it would for a 50mm lens. But if the sensor can move that much faster, why wouldn't you let it also use that speed at 50mm to give it even more compensation? Then you're right back to only getting one-eighth as much compensation for a 400mm lens as you would get with a 50mm lens.


----------



## Joules (May 27, 2020)

Matthew19 said:


> Remember this is a video centric camera.


It isn't. It shoots 12 FPS 45 MP stills mechanical and 20 FPS in e Shutter mode. With AF. That kind of throughput also makes it possible to do high res video, but they go hand jn hand. You don't give up anything on the stills side for those video features.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 27, 2020)

Matthew19 said:


> Remember this is a video centric camera. The video features are on par and beyond the 1dxIII,



It's a general purpose camera made for both stills and video. The video capabilities have been getting more attention because Canon's March announcement was planned for a trade show that is video-centric and thus concentrated on revealing video features. That, and the fact that it will have video resolution and frame rate capabilities that no other hybrid stills/video camera from any brand has yet to offer. But it will also offer resolution and frame rate combinations that no other still camera from any brand has offered to date.


----------



## sanj (May 27, 2020)

brad-man said:


> If you buy from Amazon, you will pay sales tax. There are many vendors that sell on Amazon and Amazon "fulfills" the order. In this case there is no sales tax. Unfortunately you also run the risk of counterfeit goods.


There is no counterfeit 5


----------



## Nelu (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> They also have to make up the difference if the employee doesn't net $7.25/hr after tips.


And this is related to the thread how?


----------



## SteveC (May 27, 2020)

sanj said:


> There is no counterfeit 5



Well if someone sees a 5 right now...it's counterfeit.


----------



## Jayk0607 (May 27, 2020)

I'd be so excited if the launching price is $3,500 and hope to find a deal during Black Friday sale.


----------



## Jayk0607 (May 27, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> No you don't, as I mentioned before it depends on the state you live in and how far along the state you live in is in mandating sales tax for online purchases. They did not charge me sales tax and I did not use their credit card and I built a C200 rig over the last two weeks using B&H.



I'm in CA as well and B&H started charging taxes sometime early-mid 2019 and Adorama followed late 2019.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (May 27, 2020)

I said 2 months ago $3999 absolute max. It's a spec beast but it should not be a lot dearer than the A7RIV if they want to hammer home their advantage. $3599 would put the hurt on Sony and Nikon big time if the camera lives up to the hype. Prices cuts would be incoming in 3 2 1.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (May 27, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> That sounds pretty horrible and would make me leave Canon for good.



Well I was joking and I don't think Canon will do subscription for in-camera features, but technically it's totally possible. In fact, jokes aside, depending on the price, it could be a good option. If you know the camera will last say 4-5 years, you can calculate the total cost of running the camera including subscription.


----------



## derpderp (May 27, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> I personally think it will be less but am happy at anything less than 4K. What I love about the RF mount is that it is not compatible with the Sony mount so no more using the superb and superior Canon lenses on your Sony. If you want the fantastic RF lenses you will need to go Canon all the way. Brilliant move on Canon's part. PS the same can be said for Nikon as well with their new S mount.
> This will really hurt Sony more than the camera itself as their minuscule mount does have development limitations, it is even smaller than the little Canon M mount.



lol you seem to hate on sony for no apparent reason. it's always good to have competition - keeps canon on its toes.


----------



## edoorn (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Maybe, but my guess is not by much, if any.
> 
> Field reports from those using the 1D X Mark III indicate it does very well with face detect and eye detect for both humans and animals, both in Live View and with OVF based PDAF.



I'm sure it focusses excellent. However, the 1dX III does not have animal eye or face detect in live view. 

And FWIW, I do think that for face or eye tracking, on sensor focussing can surpass what's possible with an OVF. I think we've sort of hit the limit there.


----------



## Quackator (May 27, 2020)

In Germany, many reputable dealers list the Sony A7R IV 
at 3999 EUR including 19% VAT, offering a 400 EUR trade-in 
for an effective 3599 EUR inclusing VAT.

The R5 will undercut this to make sure the Sony is dead.

My bet still goes to 3500 EUR including VAT in Germany.


----------



## Joules (May 27, 2020)

edoorn said:


> I'm sure it focusses excellent. However, the 1dX III does not have animal eye or face detect in live view.


It does have face detect and human eye AF in LiveView though.

"In Live View shooting, the EOS-1D X Mark III’s AF system supports face, head and, most noteworthy, eye detection AF tracking"

The eye AF isn't present in the OVF AF, indicating that LiveView AF performance does kind of outperform OVF performance already. And that's despite the 1DX III having such a huuuge upgrade in AF tech over previous DSLR.

Since the R5 officially gets eye AF for animals, including birds, I would not be surprised if the 1DX gets a firmware upgrade down the line to get those too. Though only in LiveView of course.


----------



## Joules (May 27, 2020)

Quackator said:


> In Germany, many reputable dealers list the Sony A7R IV
> at 3999 EUR including 19% VAT, offering a 400 EUR trade-in
> for an effective 3599 EUR inclusing VAT.
> 
> ...


The 5D IV started at 4129 €. I would be shocked if they go below that.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 27, 2020)

So, two things.
Firstly, This appears to be good news, although there seems to be comments that the US price is before tax which I couldn't see in the release? Despite that, it's good that it is under $4,000 but by how much lol. Another teaser lol.
The announcement date seems to have changed to July. Annoying but it is what it is and I'm sure that Canon have good reasons for this. I assume deliveries could start in august or September if they have the stock?

*Secondly*, I'm quite relaxed and broadminded but there seems to be an increasing number of comments that include politics, sometimes directly, other times masquerading as justification about a particular issue like pricing or healthcare. Come on guys, this is a forum about cameras not about politics. One is fun and engaging (cameras), the other (politics) whilst a massive and important topic is divisive in the extreme but not something we should include here, maybe try twitter or another social media platform if you feel the need to voice your political thoughts?

Cheers


----------



## Steve Balcombe (May 27, 2020)

Joules said:


> ... in other news the sky is blue.


Exactly .


----------



## edoorn (May 27, 2020)

Joules said:


> It does have face detect and human eye AF in LiveView though.
> 
> "In Live View shooting, the EOS-1D X Mark III’s AF system supports face, head and, most noteworthy, eye detection AF tracking"
> 
> ...


sorry, I meant animal eye and animal face and body detect.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 27, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> So, two things.
> Firstly, This appears to be good news, although there seems to be comments that the US price is before tax which I couldn't see in the release? Despite that, it's good that it is under $4,000 but by how much lol. Another teaser lol.
> The announcement date seems to have changed to July. Annoying but it is what it is and I'm sure that Canon have good reasons for this. I assume deliveries could start in august or September if they have the stock?
> 
> ...


So how do you answer a ridiculous comment like "rip off Britain" without pointing out the different way taxes are listed on prices and the different things you get for those taxes?

Or more succinctly, how do you point out valid reasoning for quite different pricing structures worldwide without touching on broader issues? Or, how do you get people to stop comparing apples to oranges?

I was answering an often stated falsehood and have gotten 30 40 odd likes for doing it, I have been doing that all the time I have been here and I won't stop or apologize. Next time it will be about how "sensors with more pixels make more noise", or "a pro would never use that it's only got one card slot", "DR doesn't change with sensor size", "depth of field is constant and doesn't change with output size/viewing distance", "you can't handhold a camera with more than 35mp", "equivalence is a fallacy because you don't have to change iso", " there is no point in those MP because the lenses can't resolve it"..........


----------



## BC (May 27, 2020)

$3999 USD and the entire image sensor is going to be an after-purchase add-on you can send the camera in to get installed.


----------



## Otara (May 27, 2020)

I foresee a future where the price is 4001 and CR needs to go into hiding.


----------



## domo_p1000 (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> That's funny. The EOS-1 wasn't introduced until September of 1989.


You are quite right!! Old age getting to me!


----------



## RunAndGun (May 27, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> In the USA, depending on the website that you order it from you won't pay any taxes on the camera. Are you supposed to then self report at the end of the year..yes, does anyone do that, that's a different story. And we are still talking about buying new, in the used market taxes are all but non existent.



And don’t forget about things like the PayBoo card with B&H where you receive an instant credit/reward on the CC account equal to the sales tax amount, so sales tax is paid to your state* for your purchase, but when you pay your CC bill, it is only equal to the pre-tax amount.

*Not every state has sales tax and the program is not available for ever state.


----------



## RunAndGun (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If you are buying from an authorized seller instead of grey market, not paying sales tax is becoming rarer and rarer as various states pass legislation that allows them to require out of state sellers to collect sales tax on items shipped to their state. This has really taken off since a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision ruled in favor of such states. B&H, Adorama, Amazon, etc. all now charge me 8% sales tax on all online purchases, even though none of them have a physical presence in my home state.



Hopefully you are and are able to take advantage of B&H’s PayBoo card. Saves me hundreds of dollars a year.


----------



## degos (May 27, 2020)

6degrees said:


> Many years ago, people said same thing to amazon. Now amazon is like a public enemy and will kill all competitors.



Amazon re-invested its net revenue back into growth, so that it didn't show a profit on paper. That's very different to spending more than a company earns.

As for this R5, I've lost interest at this point. If they ever do a cheaper R5.5 with the resolution of the R5 but without the crazy video bias then I'd buy.


----------



## RunAndGun (May 27, 2020)

Del Paso said:


> Because you are convinced that health insurance in Europe is free ???
> Many Europeans would happily pay only $500 a month...



But that is just to HAVE it. Using it costs more. Think of it like buying a car and it’s $500/month, but the car can only sit in your driveway or garage. And you can’t even sit in it. You just get to tell your friends you have it. If you want to drive it, you have to pay more and those fees are different depending on how you drive it, where you drive it, etc.


----------



## Cyborx (May 27, 2020)

What a waiting game this is... let's hope this camera will not be 4000 in euros but around 3600, as it should be converted to euros. But it probably will be 4000 in euros as Canon is famous for charging mind-blowing prices for their gear. Let's hope this camera will be the first one delivering 100% crisp sharp images in the Canon range.


----------



## dancan (May 27, 2020)

Joules said:


> The 5D IV started at 4129 €. I would be shocked if they go below that.


Thats right, a prize under 3500 EUR including VAT is a (sweet) dream


----------



## Kit. (May 27, 2020)

degos said:


> As for this R5, I've lost interest at this point. If they ever do a cheaper R5.5 with the resolution of the R5 but without the crazy video bias then I'd buy.


There is no reason for such a camera to be "cheaper". It will cost exactly the same to produce, but won't sell well.

The only way they can make the crippled version look "cheaper" than the non-crippled one is by raising the prices on the latter. Do we really want that?


----------



## Billybob (May 27, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> it will win those who want nearly as fast as the 7 and nearly as hi res as the 9. It avoids the hard choice by offering both.


Since the 9 is the speed camera and the 7R is the hi res line, it looks like you reversed your comparisons (the Sony 7 line tops out at 10 fps and the 9 has a max resolution of 24MP).


----------



## Richard Anthony (May 27, 2020)

Question for you all - would you buy a grey import of the R5 , or would you prefer to buy from a dealer considering it's so new .


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 27, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> So how do you answer a ridiculous comment like "rip off Britain" without pointing out the different way taxes are listed on prices and the different things you get for those taxes?
> 
> Or more succinctly, how do you point out valid reasoning for quite different pricing structures worldwide without touching on broader issues? Or, how do you get people to stop comparing apples to oranges?
> 
> I was answering an often stated falsehood and have gotten 30 odd likes for doing it, I have been doing that all the time I have been here and I won't stop or apologize. Next time it will be about how "sensors with more pixels make more noise", or "a pro would never use that it's only got one card slot", "DR doesn't change with sensor size", "depth of field is constant and doesn't change with output size/viewing distance", "you can't handhold a camera with more than 35mp", "equivalence is a fallacy because you don't have to change iso", " there is no point in those MP because the lenses can't resolve it"..........


Hi, I'm sorry if you took this personally, I didn't add this specifically about yours or anyone's comment in particular, it was a general comment on the many threads and topics lately having content that wasn't really about Canon. And BTW I don't think anyone should apologise about an opinion unless it causes harm to someone.

The whole subject of social media and people making comments about topics or people is a massive thing & too big and inappropriate to cover here, suffice to say the vicious circle of someone saying something and then someone replying and so on and so on, can go on for ever and potentially get very nasty.

My philosophy is that everyone has & is entitled to their own opinion about absolutely everything and sometimes someone will take umbrage at it and respond in kind. To me the best way to respond is, *don't respond*, as unless it is agreeing with the comment, any response gives it air time and more oxygen and it will snowball out of control. If someone is saying something that is wrong, unless it is causing harm, let them get on with it. 

I understand sometimes a comment may be based on incorrect facts and it's hard not to correct them but no one likes to be told they are wrong. You know they are wrong and I bet loads more do as well but there's little to be gained by publicly saying so.

Lol, I'm breaking my own rule here responding but then your comments weren't really inflammatory.

You obviously have a wide amount of knowledge so it's always great to share experiences about Canon products.


----------



## justaCanonuser (May 27, 2020)

dancan said:


> 3.999,99


3.999,999999 

In fact, I am positively surprised, in particular if the R5 hits Europe at the same price level. I expected Canon to settle the R5 in a higher price range. Well, they have really decided to fight Sony. Great to see the old and the new Sumo champions in the arena. All of us users can only profit from such a strong competition.


----------



## Go Wild (May 27, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> 3.999,999999
> 
> In fact, I am positively surprised, in particular if the R5 hits Europe at the same price level. I expected Canon to settle the R5 in a higher price range. Well, they have really decided to fight Sony. Great to see the old and the new Sumo champions in the arena. All of us users can only profit from such a strong competition.



It wont have the same price due to conversions, taxes, and import fees. All the cameras have different prices from USA to Europe. And please, I don´t want to be a part of the taxes and payments discussion!  My bet is that the EOS R5 should be around 3500/3600 US dolars and it will have the price of 4500/4600€ in Europe.


----------



## justaCanonuser (May 27, 2020)

padam said:


> a whole new wave of YouTube reaction videos incoming...


I look forward to Polin's unbox & sniff test... or did he already start with trying the shutter button?


----------



## justaCanonuser (May 27, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> It wont have the same price due to conversions, taxes, and import fees. All the cameras have different prices from USA to Europe. And please, I don´t want to be a part of the taxes and payments discussion!  My bet is that the EOS R5 should be around 3500/3600 US dolars and it will have the price of 4500/4600€ in Europe.


The R5 price betting shop is not yet closed, you can order now special bets on international taxes


----------



## justaCanonuser (May 27, 2020)

jeffa4444 said:


> $ 3,999 US but in rip-off Britain that will translate to £ 3,999 maybe more.


I guess in UK no price will be available until they really will have left Europe in 10 years (or returned to Europe), because of intermediate tax chaos


----------



## justaCanonuser (May 27, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> I do think the RF mount hurts Canon as well though, sure there's an adapter but with RF lenses costing more than their EF equivalents, and the fact that the new bodies aren't native to the EF mount; these factors can't help but slow adoption.


Canon did something much more radical with the change from its old FD mount to the EF mount back in the late 80s/early 90s. Many Canon users were upset back then. But it was the right move, because it was a clean cut and allowed Canon to really move forward technically. This time, the transition is much smoother since EF-RF adapters seem to work very well. So users with a lot of EF glass can use it on a native mirrorless body without losing performance. I think Canon did a really great job when they created the RF mount, and they will be rewarded - within the smaller margins of an overall shrinking market that hits every camera maker, of course.


----------



## justaCanonuser (May 27, 2020)

xps said:


> No, the speaker said, that shots, taken form the 8k videos will have 35MP


Yeah, that's so breathtakingly impressive, given an EOS 5D IV has "only" 30 MP. The option to extract such highly resolved stills from video will blast also fast frame stills shooting into a new era. Mouthwatering in particular for wildlife, I have to say.


----------



## SecureGSM (May 27, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> Yeah, that's so breathtakingly impressive, given an EOS 5D IV has "only" 30 MP. The option to extract such highly resolved stills from video will blast also fast frame stills shooting into a new era. Mouthwatering in particular for wildlife, I have to say.


At what shutter speed those video frames are being taken? Is that 1/1000s or faster?


----------



## mrmills4 (May 27, 2020)

I figured it'd be close to the Panasonic S1H...


----------



## cayenne (May 27, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> You have to sign up for their Payboo credit card to receive a credit for the tax amount. Make sure you pay off the card before the due date because the annual interest rate is around 26%.



Funny...I've never had to do that to date.....they just send to my state, free shipping (over a certain amount)...and don't charge sales tax.


----------



## cayenne (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> B&H has been charging sales tax on my purchases at least since the beginning of 2019. (Ditto for amazon, adorama, and most other non-camera related online retailers that aren't fly-by-night operations trying to fly beneath the radar.)


Well, for sure they are trying to tighten up all the holes...BUT....to date, they have not tightened them up everywhere yet.


And even on Amazon,.....if you buy from 3rd party sellers (not talking just cameras here, but anything) they often still do not charge sales tax, it is primarily only on items sold by Amazon that gets tax added.


----------



## Quackator (May 27, 2020)

Joules said:


> The 5D IV started at 4129 €. I would be shocked if they go below that.



The R5 is a technological war machine, and it is designed to win back 
every Sony user who still has EF glass attached to their Sony.

This isn't simply declaring war, it is much more blunt a takeover notive.
No appeal possible. Which means this camera will be aggressively priced.

It will win back every percent of lost market share - plus some.

The lenses and accessories don't need to be aggressively priced,
and that is where they will make up for the lower profit margin they
have on the R5. 

Remember that Canon bakes their own sensors. They don't even 
need to mark up their sensors between separate business divisions
like Sony does. They have a lot of headroom for their pricing, and
any sensor becomes cheaper in making with higher production numbers.

Which is another reason why they need high sales figures, and high 
sales figures are achieved with a low entry price. 

On top of that all manufacturing cameras has become a lot cheaper
with reduced mechanical complexity and increased percentage of
robotic assembly. I'd be surprised if ths camera would cost more than 
600 USD to make. Maybe even less than that. The rest is marketing 
and mark-ups along the sales channels.

So, in response to your quote above: Prepare to be shocked.


----------



## cayenne (May 27, 2020)

TAF said:


> If you’re right...then $3999 is clearly too much and it darn well ought to be $3499 or less.
> 
> Hear that Canon? Cheaper is better!



Just curious.

Is another $500 above your "wish price" going to break the deal for you?

I mean, just save up another couple of months and buy the damned thing if you want it, you know?


----------



## cayenne (May 27, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> And there are millions of people who work under the minimum wage because of the disgusting Minimum Tipped Wage rule where states can set the minimum wage as low as $3.89 and corporations can pool take the money left by patrons as tips to redistribute do whatever they want with.



Way back in the day....I worked restaurants....waiter and bar tender.

I was VERY happy with the set up, as that even back then, I made WAAAAAY over minimum wage. It was a sweet deal, especially for a kid in HS and college.

Its kinda like how people want to get rid of 1099 contract working and try to force everyone to be a W2 wage employee.

Its good for some, maybe for most, however...some of us don't mind putting on the "big boy pants" and do things like incorporate ourselves....take time to do the math to figure out the bill rate needed for our salary, taxes, medical, employment taxes, etc....etc.

If you know what you're worth and negotiate your bill rate, contracting can be quite lucrative and the freedom is an amazing benefit.

So, it's not a one size fits all. 

And at least with the Tipped Wage situation, if you're good at it, you can make VERY good money as a tipped employee. If you can't do that, well...there's always burger flipping for W2 full min. wage...or other careers, you know?

At least, that's my experience.

I never had to work where the company touched my tips (not the cash ones, and when I checked out, they paid me my CC tips immediately). If there are places that do that, well...if the $$ wasn't there I expected...I'd find a new place to work.

Again, even here...the individual has the responsibility to work where they can make the most $$. But I believe it is rare the restaurant that forces pooling of tips. Kitchen staff are not tipped employees.
When working bar, the bartenders tend to pool the tips for all that are on staff for that shift...since everyone is covering all patrons....but again, at end of shift...you get YOUR tips....

C


----------



## Architect1776 (May 27, 2020)

derpderp said:


> lol you seem to hate on sony for no apparent reason. it's always good to have competition - keeps canon on its toes.



I guess you seem to have missed the past several years of Sony fan boys hating on Canon users as some sort of Neanderthals using a system that has NO innovation.


----------



## cayenne (May 27, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> In the past everyone who didn't live in NY state didn't have to pay sales tax when buying from Adorama. Not so any more. Since a landmark Supreme Court decision in 2018 almost 40 states have passed legislation requiring out of state sellers to collect sales tax on sales shipped to those states. If California hasn't done so already, it's just a matter of time.
> 
> When's the last time you bought anything from Adorama and *weren't charged sales tax*?



A week or two ago from B&H....why?

And no...I did not use any sort of Payboo or whatever you're talking about either...used my own CCs....sometimes visa some times Apple Pay, whichever I get the most % cash back with....

But no special cards, no house accounts and no "rebates"...they simply did not charge sales tax, nor did they charge shipping since it was over their min. purchase for free shipping which I think is like $49?


----------



## TAF (May 27, 2020)

cayenne said:


> Just curious.
> 
> Is another $500 above your "wish price" going to break the deal for you?
> 
> I mean, just save up another couple of months and buy the damned thing if you want it, you know?



No, but every dollar saved on the body is a dollar available to apply to a lens.

How about: Buy three f2.8 RF lenses, get a free R5 body?


----------



## derpderp (May 27, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> I guess you seem to have missed the past several years of Sony fan boys hating on Canon users as some sort of Neanderthals using a system that has NO innovation.



haha i probably did miss that. just joined the photography world last year.


----------



## Quackator (May 27, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> I do think the RF mount hurts Canon as well though, sure there's an
> adapter but with RF lenses costing more than their EF equivalents,
> and the fact that the new bodies aren't native to the EF mount; these
> factors can't help but slow adoption.



Vice versa. Canon pulled off something genius with that.
Some newer EF lenses had been prepared for onboard
correction data and higher bus clock, but no DSLR ever 
made use of it. Now there's the simple adapter, shipping
basically for free with every new RF camera. It makes use
of these advanced features in select EF lenses and being
mirrorless, there is no more back/front focus.

That alone means that EF lenses perform on RF bodies at 
least as good as on EF-DSLRs - or better.

But there's more: Imagine being able to use one single
polarizer or vari-ND filter with all your EF glass, no matter 
which. Filmmakers now can open up all the way and still 
shoot 180 degree shutter. Landscape shooters don't need
those big tiles of glass and clunky filter holders anymore 
for polarizers. And they need only one small filter for all 
their lenses.

And last but not least, the RF mount allows the construction
of lenses that had been impossible before. All RF lenses so 
far have proven to be stellar performers.

So, no: The RF mount doesn't hurt Canon, it hurts every other
manufacturer.


----------



## jam05 (May 27, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Any camera can be a sports shooter; you can use a cell phone to film track and field. In fact the most popular camera at any sporting event has been the cell phone camera for many years now. My post was in reply to someone who said the R5 will make the 1DXIII obsolete. My point was the 1DX fills a niche (fast action, long distances, long whites) that the R5 does not fill and is not meant to fill. Just like Canon's Cinema series cameras fills a niche that the R5 was not meant to fill. I could say the R5 is not a Cinematic camera; does that mean you cannot shoot an entire feature film on it? No, it simply means that it was not designed to do so.


Obsolete entirely no. High mechanical FPS is required in some applications. Primarily use to increase the odds of "getting the shot". You're talking about consumers and amateurs. Get real. "Any camera can be a sports shooter". Yeah if shooting family or friends and for recreational purposes. I have been shooting professionally assignment and freelance for over two decades. ALL cameras are niche devices. Period. The majority of camera operators that I know, do not solely shoot one and only one genre. Network connection, FPS being the primary reason. And it being supplied and paid for the other reason. To get THE shot. Those that already have name and recognition have the ability to get THE shot regardless if using the 5D or the 1Dx. If you know the sport and the coreographed movements you can get the shot with either device. I know. because I have owned both. When shooting in Rio in 2016, I rarely took the 1dxII to any venues. I rarely returned directly to the hotel following. The hefty 1dx2 was not the item to be with at 2am. The entire start of any world class sprint race is only 0- 20m and only 15 strides. This is within 2.5 seconds including the 110m hurdle touchdown. Yes, the 5dmk3 is capable of getting all those strides from the worlds fastest humans from the blocks to the 20m point. If you know what you're doing and not merely pressing the shutter. As many do (spray & pray). When one is being paid and provided with the device to increase the odds of "getting the shot" and are tasked with shooting multiple events, they chose the 1dx for reliability. Skill, knowledge of the craft and of the event is the equalizer. While assisting in the development of Olympic track coach athletes, I have acquired the skill to get the shot file most easier with knowledge of the correographed & predetermined movements. Either device fits the application. With skill they are interchangeable for the application. Both appropriate for the task. It's done on a regular basis. Professionally.


----------



## SteveC (May 27, 2020)

Otara said:


> I foresee a future where the price is 4001 and CR needs to go into hiding.



Now THAT will never happen.

You're supposed to be suckered into rounding down, and thinking it's lots cheaper than it is, at a gut level. Which is why gasoline (petrol) in the United States invariably has a price that ends in nine tenths of a cent per (US) gallon. (Try pumping yourself exactly one gallon of gas and getting the change, we have nothing smaller than the cent in circulation today, and that has been true since 1857.) I'm still waiting for someone to just say "screw it" and sell it for $2:39 instead of $2.389, but people really want to stay just under round numbers.

One kwatloo wouldn't be much of a round down.


----------



## Go Wild (May 27, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> Yeah, that's so breathtakingly impressive, given an EOS 5D IV has "only" 30 MP. The option to extract such highly resolved stills from video will blast also fast frame stills shooting into a new era. Mouthwatering in particular for wildlife, I have to say.



Yes but take in account that they will be jpeg files not raw, sou without many hability to edit. Other thing, I have that option in 1dxmkII but honestly almost never used it because when we film we use lower shutterspeeds, about 1/50 or 1/100 so you end up with a blurry still image. It has some beneficts is some cases, but i find it somehow unpractical...


----------



## SteveC (May 27, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> So, two things.
> Firstly, This appears to be good news, although there seems to be comments that the US price is before tax which I couldn't see in the release? Despite that, it's good that it is under $4,000 but by how much lol. Another teaser lol.
> The announcement date seems to have changed to July. Annoying but it is what it is and I'm sure that Canon have good reasons for this. I assume deliveries could start in august or September if they have the stock?



It's not mentioned in the release, because no quoted price ever includes the sales tax in the US--unless explicitly stated so, and that's exceedingly rare. (Tariffs, excises, etc. levied by the Federal government ARE included.) Sales tax differs by state, and in some states even by locality (Colorado is a nightmare with hundreds of different sales tax rates). Thus it would be very difficult for a company to come up with "a" list price, if anyone were to try to change the custom and have it include sales tax. So, they're not going to explain what everyone in that market already knows.

[There is one possible exception to what I wrote; state gasoline taxes are included in the shown pump price, at least here in Colorado, but that's not labeled as a "sales tax."]

[Also there are proposals to replace our income tax with a federal sales tax, which would be included in the price--but that makes some degree of sense because it would be uniform. I personally would prefer it be added at the register, so people can be reminded of it every time they buy something.]

Private By Design is right that it's wrong to simply compare the US and UK prices, then blame the UK price on "ripoff", but probably should have limited himself to simply observing that the UK includes a lot of taxes in its prices that the US does not.


----------



## scyrene (May 27, 2020)

cayenne said:


> And at least with the Tipped Wage situation, if you're good at it, you can make VERY good money as a tipped employee. If you can't do that, well...there's always burger flipping for W2 full min. wage...or other careers, you know?
> 
> Again, even here...the individual has the responsibility to work where they can make the most $$.



It worked for you so it must be fine? There are lots of reasons people tip more or less, some of which are linked to ingrained prejudice. Tl;dr it's not a level playing field.

As for your second point, wow. Clearly people being paid too little just aren't trying hard enough, right?  

(This is all way off topic, but so is the whole thread).


----------



## Architect1776 (May 27, 2020)

derpderp said:


> haha i probably did miss that. just joined the photography world last year.



That is fine, they have been more quiet since the introduction of the RF mount as they saw the handwriting on the wall. Then the R5 was announced and the real panic set in with more silence.


----------



## SteveC (May 27, 2020)

degos said:


> Amazon re-invested its net revenue back into growth, so that it didn't show a profit on paper. That's very different to spending more than a company earns.
> 
> As for this R5, I've lost interest at this point. If they ever do a cheaper R5.5 with the resolution of the R5 but without the crazy video bias then I'd buy.



*sigh* again with this nonsense.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> It's not mentioned in the release, because no quoted price ever includes the sales tax in the US--unless explicitly stated so, and that's exceedingly rare. (Tariffs, excises, etc. levied by the Federal government ARE included.) Sales tax differs by state, and in some states even by locality (Colorado is a nightmare with hundreds of different sales tax rates). Thus it would be very difficult for a company to come up with "a" list price, if anyone were to try to change the custom and have it include sales tax. So, they're not going to explain what everyone in that market already knows.
> 
> [There is one possible exception to what I wrote; state gasoline taxes are included in the shown pump price, at least here in Colorado, but that's not labeled as a "sales tax."]
> 
> ...


Learn something new everyday  . I didn't know about the tax being quoted so thanks for that.

Cheers


----------



## koenkooi (May 27, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> That is fine, they have been more quiet since the introduction of the RF mount as they saw the handwriting on the wall. Then the R5 was announced and the real panic set in with more silence.



"But the R5 won't take still pictures!!!!"


----------



## Angler13 (May 27, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Why do people insist on saying this every time a price for anything is mentioned? UK prices are listed inclusive of tax USA prices are not. In the UK the health service is included in your tax bill, in the USA it is not, personally I'd pay a few hundred dollars more each time I bought a camera and got health insurance included, in the USA you 'save' a few hundred dollars on the cost of your camera and spend $500 every single month on health insurance because "Freedom".


----------



## sanj (May 27, 2020)

jam05 said:


> You're talking about consumers and amateurs. Get real. "Any camera can be a sports shooter". Yeah if shooting family or friends and for recreational purposes. I have been shooting professionally for over two decades. ALL cameras are niche devices. Period. The majority of camera operators and photogs along side of me that shoot with a 1dx do not solely shoot one and only one genre. The only readson it is used is because of FPS and AF. To get THE shot. Those that already have name and recognition have the ability to get THE shot regardless if using the 5D or the 1Dx. If you know the sport and the coreographed movements you can get the shot with either device. I know. because I own both.


Yes and a big NO. I owned both. Things were never predictable for me when shooting action. Things never went as planned in wildlife etc. So higher fps helps a lot. Also better focus. As you mention above.


----------



## SteveC (May 27, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Learn something new everyday  . I didn't know about the tax being quoted so thanks for that.
> 
> Cheers



When you're an American travelling in Europe, and no doubt vice-versa, the little things are surprising. I see round prices in Europe (e.g., 7 euros, not $6.99), and they're what you actually pay. There's no added "ding" at the register as you get charged 8.2% sales tax (or whatever it is--Colorado's sales tax rate has relentlessly crept upwards and our roads still suck) to make the purchase total $7.56. (Things like groceries are often sales tax exempt.)

The last time I was in Europe I found it hard to get hold of really small change, because prices posted AND paid were pretty "round." Then once having obtained small change, I couldn't get rid of it! I guess a grocery paying by the kilo would have worked. Otherwise, no.

I remember checking out at some place in the US and the total coming out to EXACTLY $100.00. I told the cashier to get their register checked for a malfunction.


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Well I was joking and I don't think Canon will do subscription for in-camera features, but technically it's totally possible. In fact, jokes aside, depending on the price, it could be a good option. If you know the camera will last say 4-5 years, you can calculate the total cost of running the camera including subscription.



In a way that already exists...you can lease camera equipment and turn it in at the end. This obviously only applies to higher end equipment but it is an option. Also, I only buy equipment that I feel I will use on a large amount of jobs or equipment that is not tied to the camera system (i.e audio equipment, lighting, etc) and when a client needs for example 3 camera angles I just rent the equipment for that project.


----------



## Danglin52 (May 27, 2020)

cayenne said:


> Funny...I've never had to do that to date.....they just send to my state, free shipping (over a certain amount)...and don't charge sales tax.



I live in Georgia and about a year ago they started chargintax on all purchases. If you sign-up for this card, they will give you a credit back for the value of the sales tax.


----------



## bbasiaga (May 27, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> So, two things.
> Firstly, This appears to be good news, although there seems to be comments that the US price is before tax which I couldn't see in the release? Despite that, it's good that it is under $4,000 but by how much lol. Another teaser lol.
> The announcement date seems to have changed to July. Annoying but it is what it is and I'm sure that Canon have good reasons for this. I assume deliveries could start in august or September if they have the stock?
> 
> ...


Since taxes vary widely across the US, prices are always quoted without tax. For instance, I live in Indiana, about 45minutes drive from Chicago, which is in Illinois. My sales tax is 7%. If I went to buy it in Chicago, it would be 11%. If I went outside of Chicago to another part of Illinois it would be between 7.5 and 9%, depending on exactly where. 

Brian


----------



## Kit. (May 27, 2020)

TAF said:


> If you’re right...then $3999 is clearly too much and it darn well ought to be $3499 or less.
> 
> Hear that Canon? Cheaper is better!


Please Canon, don't listen to that. Don't try to save even a cent by using inferior parts (in the EVF in particular).


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

jam05 said:


> *Obsolete entirely no. *



Hint...you are saying the same thing I said, nothing after that statement is really relevant. My entire post was simply stating that the R5 is not going to make the 1DXIII obsolete anymore than the 5DIV made the 1DXII obsolete.


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> And don’t forget about things like the PayBoo card with B&H where you receive an instant credit/reward on the CC account equal to the sales tax amount, so sales tax is paid to your state* for your purchase, but when you pay your CC bill, it is only equal to the pre-tax amount.
> 
> *Not every state has sales tax and the program is not available for ever state.



I may need to keep that as a plan B if they ever start charging sales tax in my state. Right now my state is even doing a sales tax holiday due to COVID...makes you wonder if online retailers that do charge sales tax have a way to accommodate gaps like that.


----------



## melgross (May 27, 2020)

PhotoRN86 said:


> You must not have read the other forum post when the previous pricing rumor came out... plenty of people thought it would be well over 4K because of the specs. This is perfect for me and within my planned budget for this camera


I read them, but I don’t think any of them really believed it.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> When you're an American travelling in Europe, and no doubt vice-versa, the little things are surprising. I see round prices in Europe (e.g., 7 euros, not $6.99), and they're what you actually pay. There's no added "ding" at the register as you get charged 8.2% sales tax (or whatever it is--Colorado's sales tax rate has relentlessly crept upwards and our roads still suck) to make the purchase total $7.56. (Things like groceries are often sales tax exempt.)
> 
> The last time I was in Europe I found it hard to get hold of really small change, because prices posted AND paid were pretty "round." Then once having obtained small change, I couldn't get rid of it! I guess a grocery paying by the kilo would have worked. Otherwise, no.
> 
> I remember checking out at some place in the US and the total coming out to EXACTLY $100.00. I told the cashier to get their register checked for a malfunction.


Welcome to the wonderful world of the UK and Europe lol.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 27, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> Since taxes vary widely across the US, prices are always quoted without tax. For instance, I live in Indiana, about 45minutes drive from Chicago, which is in Illinois. My sales tax is 7%. If I went to buy it in Chicago, it would be 11%. If I went outside of Chicago to another part of Illinois it would be between 7.5 and 9%, depending on exactly where.
> 
> Brian


Thats the price of local independence I suppose lol. Sucks if you live in Chicago though, just from a tax perspective I mean. I'm sure Chicago is a great place to live as is Indiana and Illinois. I'll stop digging now lol.


----------



## Rumours not rumors (May 27, 2020)

So if this price guesstimate is close to the mark, it would equate to selling a kidney in Australia )-: 
All I wish for is an EOS body that can fire around 7 to 10 frames / second with decent low light performance down to better than ISO 40,000 and a limitless or at least very large JPEG buffer. The 90D is not bad but to only be able to fire 5 seconds of shots before the buffer fills is absurd. I take my 750D out on weekends and usually end up with 6,000-8,000 images to sift through by Sunday night because for sports I will often just keep the shutter pressed down for several minutes at a time - it never fills the buffer on JPEG's but it has worn the shutter out 4 times whilst under warranty. Interestingly I can easily shoot 8,000 pics on 2 standard Canon batteries too - try that with a mirrorless. It's shameful that the 77D and 800D do not have a battery grip available. It smacks of deliberately forcing customers who like a meaty grip to have to buy an 80D or bigger if they want a battery grip. All the hype around the R5 seems impressive especially the IBIS which would be a plus for non-IS EF lenses but personally for me, all the video niceties are as useful as a one-legged man in a bum kicking contest... just saying.


----------



## yeahright (May 27, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Welcome to the wonderful world of the UK and Europe lol.


Last time I checked, the UK was still part of Europe, albeit not of the EU anymore.


----------



## joestopper (May 27, 2020)

6degrees said:


> Canon EOS 5D Mark IV : $2,499.00
> Canon EOS R: $1,799.00
> Sony a7iIV: $3,498.
> 
> If Canon R5 is above $3500, it will be a tough sell.



Hello, you need to consider the 5DIV market intro price. That that and put some inflation adjustment on top then it is close to 4k USD for 5R. It will certainly be considered reasonable at that price point.


----------



## Quackator (May 27, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Yes but take in account that they will be jpeg files not raw, sou without many hability to edit.



Wrong. The R5 is announced with the ability to shoot 8kp30 in RAW.


----------



## cayenne (May 27, 2020)

scyrene said:


> It worked for you so it must be fine? There are lots of reasons people tip more or less, some of which are linked to ingrained prejudice. Tl;dr it's not a level playing field.
> 
> As for your second point, wow. Clearly people being paid too little just aren't trying hard enough, right?
> 
> (This is all way off topic, but so is the whole thread).




Well, given the same job...you are offered equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.

I gave great service, even more, I knew how to schmooze people, use people skills.....and even when I had trouble, like if the Kitchen or even I messed up, I usually got over tippled, due to being able to make a joke out of things, get them something extra at the end, whatever it took to make them happy.

Yes, skills any good server should be able to learn and develop. Sure, there were times that I got stiffed...it happens.

And with how you mentioned some people have _"to ingrained prejudice" _ to some severs, it works ALL ways, not just one. It hit me too.

And to a large extent...yes, very often people get paid less because they are NOT trying hard enough.

That is a fact.

And not everyone is cut out to have a public facing job, that's ok....there ARE other jobs in the world.


----------



## deleteme (May 27, 2020)

cayenne said:


> Well, given the same job...you are offered equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.
> 
> I gave great service, even more, I knew how to schmooze people, use people skills.....and even when I had trouble, like if the Kitchen or even I messed up, I usually got over tippled, due to being able to make a joke out of things, get them something extra at the end, whatever it took to make them happy.
> 
> ...





cayenne said:


> Well, given the same job...you are offered equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.
> 
> 
> And to a large extent...yes, very often people get paid less because they are NOT trying hard enough.
> ...



IOW, if you are poor it is your fault?

Sorry but you have not seen much of the world if you believe people making poor wages are not trying hard enough. 
This is a foundational narrative of the "prosperity gospel" and the moral failure narrative of the poor. Thus we have punitive policies directed at poor families that are allegedly aimed at "incentivizing" them to greater effort when in fact serve to add more pain to a family already struggling. It erects barriers to education, health care, mental health and the other opportunities taken for granted by the more fortunate.


----------



## vjlex (May 27, 2020)

Unbelievable how off-topic these forums can get. Please guys...


----------



## cullen171 (May 27, 2020)

My guess was always $3,799.00 so I’ll stick with that.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 27, 2020)

yeahright said:


> Last time I checked, the UK was still part of Europe, albeit not of the EU anymore.


Picky, sorry.


----------



## geffy (May 27, 2020)

the thing is the start up price is irrelevant as supply will be less than demand and people like me never buy in the first year anyway and its not just cost, i want to make sure its ok first as i am not sending back for fixes


----------



## cayenne (May 27, 2020)

Normalnorm said:


> IOW, if you are poor it is your fault?
> 
> Sorry but you have not seen much of the world if you believe people making poor wages are not trying hard enough.
> This is a foundational narrative of the "prosperity gospel" and the moral failure narrative of the poor. Thus we have punitive policies directed at poor families that are allegedly aimed at "incentivizing" them to greater effort when in fact serve to add more pain to a family already struggling. It erects barriers to education, health care, mental health and the other opportunities taken for granted by the more fortunate.



Ok, I'll try to leave it at this.

You are extrapolating what I said to a much larger scale to which I was not speaking towards.

I was talking specifically about the US...not "the world".

I was also specifically talking about tipped waiters / bartenders in the US, something I have had experience with and yes, some people are better at it that others and will make more $$ at it....some are not good enough or don't put in the effort to make it in those. industries.

And that's ok....there are other jobs in the world.

I'll try to drop it at this...I wasn't speaking nearly so broadly as you are trying to stretch my former comments.

HTH,

C


----------



## David_E (May 27, 2020)

cayenne said:


> _And to a large extent...yes, very often people get paid less because they are NOT trying hard enough.
> 
> That is a fact._


That is a Trumpian “alternative fact,” i.e., a bare-faced lie.


----------



## Go Wild (May 27, 2020)

Quackator said:


> Wrong. The R5 is announced with the ability to shoot 8kp30 in RAW.


No....That doesn´t mean that you can extract a RAW STILL from the raw video file. To extract the image the camera must process a totally new file, so it must edit a grabbed frame fro the raw video file. Yo are talking about 2 different raw files here....Video raw file and a still raw file. 

Now...I´m not saying that the new R5 can extract a RAW still from a video file (even the video file is raw), but I would be very surprised if it does it!!!


----------



## SteveC (May 27, 2020)

cayenne said:


> And to a large extent...yes, very often people get paid less because they are NOT trying hard enough.
> 
> That is a fact.





David_E said:


> That is a Trumpian “alternative fact,” i.e., a bare-faced lie.



So you're saying that people DO NOT get paid less when they don't try hard enough? That's the logical negation of the statement you are calling a bare faced lie. I guess if you're right I should stop putting in any effort at all, since it makes no difference.


----------



## herein2020 (May 27, 2020)

Quackator said:


> Wrong. The R5 is announced with the ability to shoot 8kp30 in RAW.



Raw video has nothing to do with raw stills. Extracting a still from video will nearly always yield discernably lower quality than working with a raw source image. After the raw video debayering process you will still have nothing comparable to a raw still quality and metadata wise; not to mention motion blur since typically video is shot at a 180 degree shutter angle.


----------



## Kit. (May 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> So you're saying that people DO NOT get paid less when they don't try hard enough? That's the logical negation of the statement you are calling a bare faced lie. I guess if you're right I should stop putting in any effort at all, since it makes no difference.


The word "often" surprisingly left your "logical negation".


----------



## Kit. (May 27, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Raw video has nothing to do with raw stills. Extracting a still from video will nearly always yield discernably lower quality than working with a raw source image. After the raw video debayering process you will still have nothing comparable to a raw still quality and metadata wise; not to mention motion blur since typically video is shot at a 180 degree shutter angle.


If you want use video recording exclusively to produce a 30fps series of raw stills, you would not need to limit yourself to 180 degree shutter angle for that (unless the camera gives you no control over it).


----------



## BeenThere (May 27, 2020)

Kit. said:


> The word "often" surprisingly left your "logical negation".


Move over to Twitter where they love to debate this stuff. This is Canon Rumors.


----------



## Kit. (May 27, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> Move over to Twitter where they love to debate this stuff. This is Canon Rumors.


You move to Twitter if you know that they love to debate there (I personally don't).

This is Canon Rumors, we love to point on fallacies here.


----------



## yeahright (May 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> So you're saying that people DO NOT get paid less when they don't try hard enough? That's the logical negation of the statement you are calling a bare faced lie. I guess if you're right I should stop putting in any effort at all, since it makes no difference.


No, the logical negation of the implication "often people getting paid less implies they do not try hard enough" is "often people try hard enough and still get paid less". Or, more formally, if P: "people get paid less" and Q: "they do not try hard enough". Then the original statement is (P implies Q). The negation of this implication, (not (P implies Q)) is equal to (P and not Q), which is "people get paid less and they do try hard enough."


----------



## SteveC (May 27, 2020)

Kit. said:


> The word "often" surprisingly left your "logical negation".



Fair enough. Here's the original statement: "And to a large extent...yes, very often people get paid less because they are NOT trying hard enough."

So the logical negation should be "it is not the case that very often people get paid less because they are not trying hard enough" Replacing with symbols, "It is not the case that A very often happens because of B."

You're denying that B often causes A. Thus you are denying that not trying hard enough very often leads to people being paid less.


----------



## yeahright (May 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Sorry, no. He's saying "they do not try hard enough" _causes_ (okay, _very often causes_) "they get paid less." A is caused by B isn't the same as A implies B, because A could have other causes.


You are right. I accidentally reversed the implication. It should have been the other way round, B (do not try hard enough) implies A (get paid less). The negation of this would be (B and not A) = do not try hard enough and get paid more, as you said.


----------



## SaP34US (May 27, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> No....That doesn´t mean that you can extract a RAW STILL from the raw video file. To extract the image the camera must process a totally new file, so it must edit a grabbed frame fro the raw video file. Yo are talking about 2 different raw files here....Video raw file and a still raw file.
> 
> Now...I´m not saying that the new R5 can extract a RAW still from a video file (even the video file is raw), but I would be very surprised if it does it!!!


The extracted ph0towill be 35 mp so that sounds like its RAW not jpg.


----------



## Adelino (May 27, 2020)

Maybe we should convert the R5 in percentage of hard working waiters and working class who don't try hard enough and leisure class?


----------



## Joules (May 27, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> Yeah, that's so breathtakingly impressive, given an EOS 5D IV has "only" 30 MP. The option to extract such highly resolved stills from video will blast also fast frame stills shooting into a new era. Mouthwatering in particular for wildlife, I have to say.


Rolling shutter will likely impact stills extraction from 8K video to a degree that would make it unusable for fast moving wildlife.


----------



## Tangent (May 27, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> Yeah, that's so breathtakingly impressive, given an EOS 5D IV has "only" 30 MP. The option to extract such highly resolved stills from video will blast also fast frame stills shooting into a new era. Mouthwatering in particular for wildlife, I have to say.



Very handy for "best frame" planetary and lunar photography as well.


----------



## Kit. (May 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Fair enough. Here's the original statement: "And to a large extent...yes, very often people get paid less because they are NOT trying hard enough."
> 
> So the logical negation should be "it is not the case that very often people get paid less because they are not trying hard enough" Replacing with symbols, "It is not the case that A very often happens because of B."
> 
> You're denying that B often causes A. Thus you are denying that not trying hard enough very often leads to people being paid less.


You are jumping to conclusion again. What I'm denying is the correctness of your negation. I'm not questioning the correctness of the original statement... yet.

Were I doing _that_, I would be asking for:
1. The numerical definition of "very often".
2. The studies showing correlation (to the degree of the definition)
3. The studies showing causation (as "not trying" could also be a rational behavior when the goal was not achievable in the first place).

Now, returning to your negation: there is a huge difference between "very often, A is caused by B" and "very often, B causes A", if - as we would naturally expect in such a case - "very often" tries to describe a percentage of causes or of outcomes, and not just a sheer number of events.


----------



## xanbarksdale (May 27, 2020)

cayenne said:


> Funny...I've never had to do that to date.....they just send to my state, free shipping (over a certain amount)...and don't charge sales tax.



Would you be willing to share a screenshot of a recent receipt that shows no sales tax was collected? They started charging sales tax last year due to the Supreme Court ruling...they even issued a press release about it.

For the record, I'm not saying you're lying...I spend A LOT of money at BH and have been paying sales tax for the past year. If they're not charging you sales tax I'd love to get more info about it.


----------



## peters (May 27, 2020)

cullen171 said:


> My guess was always $3,799.00 so I’ll stick with that.


I'll stick to 4199,99, including 19% VAT in germany  We will see, hoepfully soon


----------



## SteveC (May 27, 2020)

Kit. said:


> You are jumping to conclusion again. What I'm denying is the correctness of your negation. I'm not questioning the correctness of the original statement... yet.
> 
> Were I doing _that_, I would be asking for:
> 1. The numerical definition of "very often".
> ...



Ah...gotcha. for purposes of illustration, let's say "very often" means "60 percent of the time." So, "very often, B causes A" means that 60 percent of the time B is true, A is true because of a causal connection. A, on the other hand, could be true 80 percent or 30 percent of time B is false, too, and maybe B is false 99.9% of the time. The statement doesn't address that at all. Going to the other formulation, it runs that sixty percent of the time A is true, it's because B was...thus if B was only true 0.01% of the time, then at most A was true 0.1667 percent of the time.

Good catch.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> When you're an American travelling in Europe, and no doubt vice-versa, the little things are surprising. I see round prices in Europe (e.g., 7 euros, not $6.99), and they're what you actually pay. There's no added "ding" at the register as you get charged 8.2% sales tax (or whatever it is--Colorado's sales tax rate has relentlessly crept upwards and our roads still suck) to make the purchase total $7.56. (Things like groceries are often sales tax exempt.)
> 
> The last time I was in Europe I found it hard to get hold of really small change, because prices posted AND paid were pretty "round." Then once having obtained small change, I couldn't get rid of it! I guess a grocery paying by the kilo would have worked. Otherwise, no.
> 
> I remember checking out at some place in the US and the total coming out to EXACTLY $100.00. I told the cashier to get their register checked for a malfunction.


As a traveller to the US (in the past but maybe to Hawaii in the future as part of a travel bubble), the (supposedly dicrestionary!) tipping system is quite hard to comprehend and get it right. Asking them what is the normal amount gets blank faces!
For cruise ships departing from Australia, they bundle in the daily tips in the upfront cost as we would frequently request them to be deleted from our account as they are supposedly discretionary.
Carrying around a fist full of shrapnel due to the non-rounding amounts at the till is painful.
Supermarkets may have odd prices $x.99 but we got rid of 1 and 2 cent pieces so the final amount is rounded up/down if paying by cash.
As part of Covid-19 changes, many stores locally would not accept cash ie only tap-and-go cards which for most people is a normal way to pay anyway.


----------



## Otara (May 28, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Now THAT will never happen.
> 
> You're supposed to be suckered into rounding down, and thinking it's lots cheaper than it is, at a gut level. Which is why gasoline (petrol) in the United States invariably has a price that ends in nine tenths of a cent per (US) gallon. (Try pumping yourself exactly one gallon of gas and getting the change, we have nothing smaller than the cent in circulation today, and that has been true since 1857.) I'm still waiting for someone to just say "screw it" and sell it for $2:39 instead of $2.389, but people really want to stay just under round numbers.
> 
> One kwatloo wouldn't be much of a round down.


 
Psychological pricing.

I wasnt serious, just jokingly worried for CR if the price turns out to be over 4k, even if the difference is fairly meaningless from a practical perspective.


----------



## SteveC (May 28, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> As a traveller to the US (in the past but maybe to Hawaii in the future as part of a travel bubble), the (supposedly dicrestionary!) tipping system is quite hard to comprehend and get it right. Asking them what is the normal amount gets blank faces!



I'm surprised you got blank faces. It's 15% though some places are trying to raise that to 18% or even 20%. And yeah, it's "discretionary" in the sense that you CAN refuse but you will be hated on for it. [some restaurants will include it in the bill, however, especially if it's a large party. Watch for that, if the tip is included you have no further obligation.] Some advice I got once: if the service is just _awful_ rather than leave _no_ tip (which will be blamed on "gee aren't Aussies assholes" [no, you're not]), leave a very SMALL tip. That sends the message, unambiguously, that they suck--you knew you were supposed to tip, and yet this is your assessment of their worth. However, I'd never do so to a waitress/waiter if the fault clearly lies with the cook. I'd complain about the cook some other way.

I personally tip well over 15%, especially on a small check, or if they seemed to be busting their tails. Back in the day you could get a very cheap $4 lunch at some restaurants (that would make it up for dinner which would be $12 or so), I'd tip as though paying "normal" price not the cut rate lunch price; I'd tip a couple of dollars.

I've been "bitten" by not understanding customary tipping in other places. I fear on my last overseas trip I pissed off a lot of the locals because I was under the impression there was no tipping. And even when someone suggested I should tip so-and-so, I fear that I tipped too little. I have no idea. It was "third world," though, so the money I tipped might have been HUGE to them, for all I know.


----------



## Go Wild (May 28, 2020)

SaP34US said:


> The extracted ph0towill be 35 mp so that sounds like its RAW not jpg.



I Was watching the video and the video clearly mention "35MP raw photo"... WOW so if the camera allows and extraction of a RAW FILE from a video file....Then....damn! I am really impressed! I was impressed already with th EOS R5 but this is another totally new thing to add! DAMN!!!

Another possibility is that he Is mentioning normal RAW photos....But the video is almost about video features....and we don´t expect the camera to have less than 43mp because of that 8kRAW....

Another thing to increase this damn anxiety!


----------



## Adventure Kid (May 28, 2020)

wsmith96 said:


> Outta my price range.




Not meant for everyone. Go buy a used EOS R


----------



## herein2020 (May 28, 2020)

Kit. said:


> If you want use video recording exclusively to produce a 30fps series of raw stills, you would not need to limit yourself to 180 degree shutter angle for that (unless the camera gives you no control over it).



Oh I agree with you 100% that's why I said typically. Now if you are shooting video with the sole intention of extracting stills from it...then you would almost certainly increase the shutter speed (unless you wanted the motion blur). Now if the R5 has some new format that allows you to extract true raw images from the video...that would be a ground breaking feature, but in my opinion that type of capability would probably require either a format change in the output file (Canon Raw Lite Mark II anyone?) or some kind of software support to extract the stills while retaining/creating the metadata needed for raw image processors.

Either way, these are very exciting times.


----------



## herein2020 (May 28, 2020)

xanbarksdale said:


> Would you be willing to share a screenshot of a recent receipt that shows no sales tax was collected? They started charging sales tax last year due to the Supreme Court ruling...they even issued a press release about it.
> 
> For the record, I'm not saying you're lying...I spend A LOT of money at BH and have been paying sales tax for the past year. If they're not charging you sales tax I'd love to get more info about it.



Will this work for you? I've been building out a C200 for the last two weeks, BH has not charged sales tax for my location. And no, I'm not using PayBoo, boo hoo, or any other form of workaround, simply add to cart, checkout, pay now.

As multiple people on here have stated including myself, tax laws are very complex and the rollout of enforcement is not yet 100%.


----------



## rwvaughn (May 28, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Not at all, the R5 is not a sports shooter (from what we know so far), it will not win over OVF shooters (myself included), it is not as rugged as the 1DXIII, it will definitely not be used at the Olympics, etc. The 1D series has always been a specialist camera which is a niche that the R5 does not fill; pricing is not everything; that's like saying it will render the C200 obsolete just because it is cheaper and on paper has some better video features.



I expect it will be just fine for sports. I've had no problems, and neither have many others, using the 5D3 and 5D4 for sports. It's more about knowing how and when to shoot rather than spraying and praying.


----------



## David_E (May 28, 2020)

SteveC said:


> So you're saying that people DO NOT get paid less when they don't try hard enough? That's the logical negation of the statement you are calling a bare faced lie. I guess if you're right I should stop putting in any effort at all, since it makes no difference.


Would I be correct in guessing that you are a white male?


----------



## privatebydesign (May 28, 2020)

xanbarksdale said:


> Would you be willing to share a screenshot of a recent receipt that shows no sales tax was collected?



It all depends on the purchasers State law now, some States require companies of a certain size to charge tax and some don't.

I live in Florida, Amazon and Adorama now charge me sales tax, B&H doesn't.


----------



## herein2020 (May 28, 2020)

rwvaughn said:


> I expect it will be just fine for sports. I've had no problems, and neither have many others, using the 5D3 and 5D4 for sports. It's more about knowing how and when to shoot rather than spraying and praying.



You (and many others) did not read the entire post...I was responding to someone who said the R5 will make the 1DXIII obsolete; of course the 5D and R5 can be used for sports, will either make the 1D series obsolete...no.


----------



## dwarven (May 28, 2020)

xanbarksdale said:


> Would you be willing to share a screenshot of a recent receipt that shows no sales tax was collected? They started charging sales tax last year due to the Supreme Court ruling...they even issued a press release about it.
> 
> For the record, I'm not saying you're lying...I spend A LOT of money at BH and have been paying sales tax for the past year. If they're not charging you sales tax I'd love to get more info about it.



You can get their credit card that gives you a discount based on the amount of sales tax you owe. Buy it with the discount and then pay the card immediately.


----------



## xanbarksdale (May 28, 2020)

My job is in e-commerce so I’m MUCH more familiar with the inter state sales tax laws than I’d like to be, ha!

Each state has different laws which makes it an absolute NIGHTMARE for accounting. That’s why most Large online retailers collect sales tax in every state.

I live in KY and they charge sales tax when shipping here.

for large purchases I use their 0% interest credit card. I was more interested in which stares theydon’t collect taxes from.

very surprised to hear that they don’t collect tax on orders shipped to CA...especially since they released a press release last year specifically naming CA.


----------



## Jayk0607 (May 28, 2020)

xanbarksdale said:


> My job is in e-commerce so I’m MUCH more familiar with the inter state sales tax laws than I’d like to be, ha!
> 
> Each state has different laws which makes it an absolute NIGHTMARE for accounting. That’s why most Large online retailers collect sales tax in every state.
> 
> ...



Both Adorama and B&H have collected tax from me. I'm in CA. But regardless of whether vendor collects the tax or not, you still have to report and pay at the end of the year.


----------



## ddixon (May 28, 2020)

...and in TN, Amazon and B&H charge state sales tax (9.25% in my location) but B&H offers the Payboo option to avoid it. However, Adorama still does not charge state sales tax.


----------



## sanj (May 28, 2020)

No taxes in Oregon from either BH or Amazon. (Wonder why tax and Amazon are in red!)


----------



## deleteme (May 28, 2020)

cayenne said:


> Ok, I'll try to leave it at this.
> 
> You are extrapolating what I said to a much larger scale to which I was not speaking towards.
> 
> ...


I was speaking about the US also. And yes, I know a ton of people in the hospitality industry that work their butts off and still don't get the tips they deserve.


----------



## Eclipsed (May 28, 2020)

Billybob said:


> Since the 9 is the speed camera and the 7R is the hi res line, it looks like you reversed your comparisons (the Sony 7 line tops out at 10 fps and the 9 has a max resolution of 24MP).


Can you discern my point even with my imperfect recollection of Sony offerings?


----------



## Eclipsed (May 28, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> You (and many others) did not read the entire post...I was responding to someone who said the R5 will make the 1DXIII obsolete; of course the 5D and R5 can be used for sports, will either make the 1D series obsolete...no.


Glad someone is here to point out that obvious hyperbole is obvious hyperbole. Whew!


----------



## Billybob (May 28, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> Can you discern my point even with my imperfect recollection of Sony offerings?


Brother, I'm just trying to help you out. Your previous response was to the following post:

CanoKnight said:
This is not a Sony killer. Exactly what Sony model is it going to kill ? Sony has nothing comparable.

Precision matters. Thus, if you have no clue which camera in the Sony line does what, why oh why are you responding to a request for a specific model?


----------



## tomtomtom (May 28, 2020)

*It should be 3K, no more. Let's be realistic, the market is shrinking, nobody buys cameras anymore, covid19 made us all poor. I seriously think cameras are well overpriced, making money selling images is very difficult. It's just an expensive hobby and for a hobby you can do without such an expensive gadget which ages so quickly.

It will be more and more difficult to convince young phone addicts to spend this kind of money on a camera. *


----------



## sanj (May 28, 2020)

tomtomtom said:


> *It should be 3K, no more. Let's be realistic, the market is shrinking, nobody buys cameras anymore, covid19 made us all poor. I seriously think cameras are well overpriced, making money selling images is very difficult. It's just an expensive hobby and for a hobby you can do without such an expensive gadget which ages so quickly.
> 
> It will be more and more difficult to convince young phone addicts to spend this kind of money on a camera. *


There are many other cheaper cameras available for 'hobby'. This is targeted towards people who will use this for work and serious photography. 
A company can, should, and will charge what they think they can to get the best profit over the long run. They need to consider design, engineering, production costs, and market pricing.


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (May 28, 2020)

tomtomtom said:


> *It should be 3K, no more. Let's be realistic, *



Yes, you should become realistic.

$3500 is my guess, but $3000 would be like next winter's holiday prices. 

Being realistic means realizing that the R5 will be like nothing else on the market.


----------



## Quackator (May 28, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Now...I´m not saying that the new R5 can extract a RAW still from a video file (even the video file is raw), but I would be very surprised if it does it!!!



Just like people have been surprised that the R5 will record DCI 8k30 internally, right.


----------



## herein2020 (May 28, 2020)

tomtomtom said:


> *It should be 3K, no more. Let's be realistic, the market is shrinking, nobody buys cameras anymore, covid19 made us all poor. I seriously think cameras are well overpriced, making money selling images is very difficult. It's just an expensive hobby and for a hobby you can do without such an expensive gadget which ages so quickly.
> 
> It will be more and more difficult to convince young phone addicts to spend this kind of money on a camera. *



I agree with all of your points except that it should be $3K. That statement makes you sound like clients who say I should shoot their 8hr wedding for $400 since their wedding is only 30 people because of the pandemic. My overhead did not change due to the pandemic or because their events are smaller and neither did Canon's.

At the end of the day everyone has to make money to stay in business and Canon is no different. Neither you nor I know the amount of R&D that went into developing this camera, the cost of its parts, marketing, tradeshow preparations, patent applications in multiple countries, instruction manual translations, etc. etc the list goes on. Companies typically make far less on the products they sell than people realize.

If you think making money selling images is very difficult imagine trying to make money selling cameras. If you want a less expensive gadget then just buy a less expensive camera, that does not mean Canon has to price their flagship hybrid at the price you think it should be at, a price point which by the way would mean Canon is literally paying you to buy their camera. The EOS R is a great little camera for non pros, is only $1800USD, and will meet the needs of probably 99% of prosumers and hobbyists; no one is forcing you to buy the R5 and from the sound of it, you are not Canon's target audience for that body.

My favorite reference point as always is the Panasonic S1H. Panasonic had every incentive imaginable to price their S1H as competitively as possible but still was not able to get it below $4K USD. IMO the S1H is the closest body out there that rivals the specs we've seen so far for the R5 and it is $4K USD. The fact that Canon has stated they will be able to keep the R5 below $4K is an impressive enough feat on its own but saying it should be priced at $3K sounds like some arbitrary unrealistic rationalization that is not based on even a modicum of factual evidence.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (May 28, 2020)

It *should* be $100. But *will* be around $3700...


----------



## BakaBokeh (May 28, 2020)

Canon 5DmkIV was $3499 at time of release in 2016.
Accounting for cumulative inflation of 6.8% that would be $3,738.89 today*.

But inflation can't be the only indicator, because the 5D mkIII was also $3499 at release in 2012. That would give it a value of $3,908.46 in 2020*.

Going all the way back to the mkII, it had the bargain price of $2699.99 at release in 2008. That would be $3,215.23 in 2020*.

So we are all over the map as far as what a 5D typically nets.

So Canon can do one of several things:

A) Keep the recent tradition and price it at $3499.99 like the previous 4 & 3 iterations.
B) Tack on inflation and round up price at $3799,99
C) Reason that the upgrades in specs and technology are so incredibly significant that they can push it all the way to $3999.99 and still boast that they kept it under $4k.

Some other thoughts. I bought a 5DmkIV a few months before the EOS R was announced. So I weighed heavily "upgrading" so shortly after buying the 5DIV. There were so many similarities, that it made no sense to switch so early. Same sensor, identical IQ, same Dual Pixel AF system and the tradeoffs did not give me a big enough reason to switch. Like trading dual card slots for a variangle screen, or superior weather sealing for access to the wonderful, albeit limited, RF lens lineup. What was noticeable is that with all that "equivalence" I struggled with, the EOS R was significantly cheaper than the 5DIV. Like almost a thousand dollar difference. Today, that price for the EOS R is even more way down. So maybe there's something to be said about manufacturing cost for a mirrorless system being significantly lower than for a DSLR. Maybe that's why for all the incredible spec jumps, they can still keep the cost at a "5D level?"

So maybe there's another option?

D) Manufacturing cost keep the price nice and tidy and maybe accounting for an economy in shambles we get it at a jaw dropping $3299.99. After all that would put it right around the cost of the last Canon camera that was a generational game-changer: the 5DmkII.

*inflation calculated using https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/


----------



## navastronia (May 28, 2020)

. . . Absolutely no offense to anyone in particular, but this thread has gotten so achingly stupid (people fighting over politics and tax law, of all things), I hope Craig puts us all out of our misery by leaking the CR4 price _real_ soon


----------



## Rick Li (May 28, 2020)

But when? the bigggest and most asked question is not the price but "when?"


----------



## derpderp (May 28, 2020)

Honestly at this rate I don’t care about the price anymore. $3K, 4K, 6K, 8K, 10k. Whatever, just release the damn camera so I get my grubby hands on it.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 28, 2020)

derpderp said:


> Honestly at this rate I don’t care about the price anymore. $3K, 4K, 6K, 8K, 10k. Whatever, just release the damn camera so I get my grubby hands on it.


Looking at your kit, I have a similar set up, EOS R, 24-105MM f4 & 70-200MM F2.8 &I've been thinking about swapping the 24-105 for the 28-70mm for the extra aperture. Do you find you have to swap lenses often as there is no overlap?


----------



## Ozarker (May 28, 2020)

sanj said:


> No taxes in Oregon from either BH or Amazon. (Wonder why tax and Amazon are in red!)


Oregon is one of the few states with 0% sales tax. That's the reason. We used to drive over the river from Fruitland, Idaho into Ontario, Oregon for all our shopping to avoid the tax in Idaho.


----------



## unfocused (May 28, 2020)

sanj said:


> ...(Wonder why tax and Amazon are in red!)


It’s some new revenue generator for Canon Rumors Guy. Automatically adds links to our posts and he gets a cut if we buy something I guess. The algorithm sucks though as most times it sends you to something you have no interest in and it’s just an annoyance.


----------



## Go Wild (May 28, 2020)

Quackator said:


> Just like people have been surprised that the R5 will record DCI 8k30 internally, right.


Yep, right!  Always great surprises! That´s what makes this camera so"wanted" and get people so hyped. According to the video we will have 35MP raw images from grab frames! I don´t know How Canon can do it, but if it is like that, is awesome and yes, I am really surprised by that! Just great!


----------



## Random Orbits (May 28, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Looking at your kit, I have a similar set up, EOS R, 24-105MM f4 & 70-200MM F2.8 &I've been thinking about swapping the 24-105 for the 28-70mm for the extra aperture. Do you find you have to swap lenses often as there is no overlap?



The 28-70 and 24-105 don't really address the same use cases. The 28-70 is much heavier and larger -- it's not a lens that I would want to use for travel. It's a great lens for indoor events, but I would not consider it a general use lens. The RF 28-70 also uses 95mm filters. I'd rather stick with the more commonly available 77 and 82mm filters that already are used on f/2.8 zooms. If you do decide to pick up the 28-70, I'd keep the 24-105 for the times you want a smaller/lighter kit.

For general use, the trade is between the RF 24-105 f/4 IS and the RF 24-70 f/2.8 IS, which is similar to their EF counterparts. IQ of both lenses is good, but I usually prefer the extra stop instead of the longer focal length range. If I want to go to longer focal lengths, then I'm carrying a 2nd lens (telephoto) anyway. For portraits, the difference at the long end is between 70 /f2.8 and 105 f/4. In that case, I usually prefer the 105 f/4, but then I'd really prefer 100-135mm @ f/2.8 and a flash for fill. For general walk-around, I don't miss the 70-105mm range that often, but I do like having that extra stop indoors without a flash.


----------



## Tom W (May 28, 2020)

I am really looking forward to this camera body. That's all I have to say about that. For now...


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 28, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> The 28-70 and 24-105 don't really address the same use cases. The 28-70 is much heavier and larger -- it's not a lens that I would want to use for travel. It's a great lens for indoor events, but I would not consider it a general use lens. The RF 28-70 also uses 95mm filters. I'd rather stick with the more commonly available 77 and 82mm filters that already are used on f/2.8 zooms. If you do decide to pick up the 28-70, I'd keep the 24-105 for the times you want a smaller/lighter kit.
> 
> For general use, the trade is between the RF 24-105 f/4 IS and the RF 24-70 f/2.8 IS, which is similar to their EF counterparts. IQ of both lenses is good, but I usually prefer the extra stop instead of the longer focal length range. If I want to go to longer focal lengths, then I'm carrying a 2nd lens (telephoto) anyway. For portraits, the difference at the long end is between 70 /f2.8 and 105 f/4. In that case, I usually prefer the 105 f/4, but then I'd really prefer 100-135mm @ f/2.8 and a flash for fill. For general walk-around, I don't miss the 70-105mm range that often, but I do like having that extra stop indoors without a flash.


Cheers, always good to hear real life experience. You make a good point re the lenses being for different uses.

I love the idea of the extra stop of the 24-70 but also love the flexibility of the focal length in the 24-105. I'd love to be able to have both but not sure my budget and skills warrant the extra and not inconsiderable expense of purchasing the 24-70.

I think I may stick with what I have as most of the time I'm on city breaks and landscapes so my existing combo isn't bad.

Thanks


----------



## usern4cr (May 28, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> For general use, the trade is between the RF 24-105 f/4 IS and the RF 24-70 f/2.8 IS, which is similar to their EF counterparts. IQ of both lenses is good, but I usually prefer the extra stop instead of the longer focal length range. If I want to go to longer focal lengths, then I'm carrying a 2nd lens (telephoto) anyway. For portraits, the difference at the long end is between 70 /f2.8 and 105 f/4. In that case, I usually prefer the 105 f/4, but then I'd really prefer 100-135mm @ f/2.8 and a flash for fill. For general walk-around, I don't miss the 70-105mm range that often, but I do like having that extra stop indoors without a flash.


Thanks, RandomOrbits, for your comments comparing the RF 24-70 f2.8 and RF 24-105 f4, as I am one of many who would have to decide which one (if any) to get. But I'd also like to ask you what you think about the upcoming RF 70-135 f2 option being thrown into the mix? Assuming you have the RF 24-70 f2.8, then would adding the RF 70-200 f2.8 still be the best 2 lens solution for you - versus adding the RF 70-135 f2 and also adding (or not getting) the 70-200 f2.8?  There's a lot of great options, but at a high enough cost that it may be hard to justify getting all 3. What do you think?


----------



## stevelee (May 28, 2020)

yeahright said:


> Last time I checked, the UK was still part of Europe, albeit not of the EU anymore.


I think the UK is on a bunch of islands off the continent, so it depends upon what you mean by "Europe." They used to have holdings on the mainland, but that was a lot wars ago.


----------



## Richard Anthony (May 28, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Looking at your kit, I have a similar set up, EOS R, 24-105MM f4 & 70-200MM F2.8 &I've been thinking about swapping the 24-105 for the 28-70mm for the extra aperture. Do you find you have to swap lenses often as there is no overlap?


I have the RF 15-35 F2.8 , RF 28-70 F2 and the RF 70 -200 F2.8 , with a RP (waiting for the R5) , the 28-70 F2 is an awesome lens go for it you will love it , its big and heavy so make room in your bag .


----------



## schokuspokus (May 28, 2020)

What is the best alternative to the Canon R5/R6. Something less pricey but good enough for portrait photography.
Would love to get the R5 but a prize of guessed 4299€ but the insane cost of the R glass makes photography extremely less fun for me.
Love to have the best but this is in sum too much - as a hobby.
Full frame in a small studio would be preferred but any input is welcome.


----------



## herein2020 (May 28, 2020)

BakaBokeh said:


> Canon 5DmkIV was $3499 at time of release in 2016.
> Accounting for cumulative inflation of 6.8% that would be $3,738.89 today*.
> 
> But inflation can't be the only indicator, because the 5D mkIII was also $3499 at release in 2012. That would give it a value of $3,908.46 in 2020*.
> ...



Excellent points all, I could definitely see a possible scenario where mirrorless is cheaper to produce than the mirror. And finally, another forum member who takes into account inflation. One fact you missed though is currency exchange rates. Depending on where Canon sources the parts and the current and forecast exchange rates even they could affect what Canon is able to sell this camera at while remaining profitable.

I still think they will debut the body at $3999.00 then drop rapidly within the following year. One factor that may keep the price higher longer than it did for the EOS R is the fact that they had to develop an all new sensor, with the EOS R they were able to reuse the 5DIV's sensor so their R&D costs weren't as great.


----------



## Richard Anthony (May 28, 2020)

schokuspokus said:


> What is the best alternative to the Canon R5/R6. Something less pricey but good enough for portrait photography.
> Would love to get the R5 but a prize of guessed 4299€ but the insane cost of the R glass makes photography extremely less fun for me.
> Love to have the best but this is in sum too much - as a hobby.
> Full frame in a small studio would be preferred but any input is welcome.


If you want a portrait camera the RP is a fabulous little camera,


----------



## stevelee (May 28, 2020)

Starting out [URL='http://i.viglink.com/?key=4d330a4797ea127575531d3ebd1213b0&insertId=b29f78435f69d17e&type=KW&exp=60%3ACI1C55A%3A9&libId=kaqvvl4e0100y11i000DAykbxci27o491&loc=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.canonrumors.com%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fthreads%2Fcanon-eos-r5-launch-price-will-be-below-4000-usd-cr3.38606%2Fpage-14%23post-834010&v=1&iid=b29f78435f69d17e&out=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bhphotovideo.com%2Fc%2Fproduct%2F1433710-REG%2Fcanon_eos_r_mirrorless_digital.html&title=Canon%20EOS%20R5%20launch%20price%20will%20be%20below%20%244000%20USD%20%5BCR3%5D%20%7C%20Canon%20Rumors&txt=%3Cspan%3EEOS%20%3C%2Fspan%3E%3Cspan%3ER%3C%2Fspan%3E']EOS R[/URL] said:


> Cheers, always good to hear real life experience. You make a good point re the lenses being for different uses.
> 
> I love the idea of the extra stop of the 24-70 but also love the flexibility of the focal length in the 24-105. I'd love to be able to have both but not sure my budget and skills warrant the extra and not inconsiderable expense of purchasing the 24-70.
> 
> ...


When I bought my 6D2, I got the 24-105mm non-L kit lens, figuring it would hold me until I accumulated an arsenal of lenses to cover that range. I have been pleasantly surprised with how useful it is as an all-purpose lens. I have not missed having the extra stop or two at the upper end. With the low noise at higher ISOs I don't feel a need for fast lenses except when I want to blur backgrounds, etc. Besides saving a few bucks, I thought maybe the STM lens might be a little better suited for video, except I rarely shoot video so that wasn't much of an excuse. Of course your needs and interests could be much different from mine. If I were starting over, I wouldn't hesitate to get the f/4 L version, but really have no problems with the STM as my general purpose lens. My main point is that it is such a useful focal-length range, similar to what I'm used to on my travel cameras, the G7X II and now the G5X II.


----------



## sanj (May 28, 2020)

schokuspokus said:


> What is the best alternative to the Canon R5/R6. Something less pricey but good enough for portrait photography.
> Would love to get the R5 but a prize of guessed 4299€ but the insane cost of the R glass makes photography extremely less fun for me.
> Love to have the best but this is in sum too much - as a hobby.
> Full frame in a small studio would be preferred but any input is welcome.


Canon RP if mirrorless. If DSLR then 6D. This was easy.


----------



## herein2020 (May 28, 2020)

schokuspokus said:


> What is the best alternative to the Canon R5/R6. Something less pricey but good enough for portrait photography.
> Would love to get the R5 but a prize of guessed 4299€ but the insane cost of the R glass makes photography extremely less fun for me.
> Love to have the best but this is in sum too much - as a hobby.
> Full frame in a small studio would be preferred but any input is welcome.



ANY modern camera is a good alternative to the R5. If I were in your situation today as in right now I would be considering the following bodies:

Full Frame
EOS R - $1800.00
5D IV - $2499.00
6D II - $1199.00

Crop
7D II - $1298
90D - $1200

I am still using my 5D IV for paying gigs and have no intention at all in getting the R5. The added benefit if you go EF mount is the lenses are cheaper. No matter what hype you see on this forum regarding mirrorless, for all practical purposes you will probably never outgrow the 5DIV.

In a studio setting you really won't even see much difference between a crop and full frame since you can properly light the scene which will save even more money. There are well respected portrait studio photographers who are even shooting MFT bodies such as the Olympus or Fuji where you will see a massive savings over the cost of FF lenses.

Joe Edelman is a fantastic portrait photographer and he uses an Olympus, in fact Joe Edelman is such a good Olympus ambassador and the Olympus has some pretty amazing portrait features which he showcases on his channel that when I retire I will probably ditch Canon and switch to Olympus for the occasional travel snap or portrait session :









Joe Edelman


Joe Edelman teaches the HOWS and WHYS behind great photographs. He shares the thought process that a professional photographer uses to approach his work. Joe...




www.youtube.com


----------



## IcyBergs (May 28, 2020)

schokuspokus said:


> What is the best alternative to the Canon R5/R6. Something less pricey but good enough for portrait photography.
> Would love to get the R5 but a prize of guessed 4299€ but the insane cost of the R glass makes photography extremely less fun for me.
> Love to have the best but this is in sum too much - as a hobby.
> Full frame in a small studio would be preferred but any input is welcome.


Portrait photography especially if it's studio work with controlled lighting isn't very demanding task for a camera, and you don't need many of the specs you would be paying for with an R5 purchase.

My advice would be to buy a grey market new 5Ds for around $1100, you'll have an ideal studio camera and you will save a ton of money on buying clean used EF glass rather than new RF lenses with IQ that will meet or exceed your expectations.

You can own the 50mp 5DS a clean EF 85 1.4L, and 135L for less than $3k if you're a savvy buyer. That's a nice pro portrait kit.


----------



## [email protected] (May 28, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> but . I think Canon did a really great job when they created the RF mount, and they will be rewarded - within the smaller margins of an overall shrinking market that hits every camera maker, of course.



Having owned the R, I can say that the adapter worked perfectly across a dozen lenses of vastly different ages and types, including obscure third party macro lenses. It was very impressive. The feature-added adapters were brilliant, especially the filter holder one.

But one thing I fear for is the loss of a robust third party lens market with the RF Mount. 1/2 my lenses were better third party models. Not just cheaper. And some of my best Canon glass was pushed by those third parties like Sigma.


----------



## herein2020 (May 28, 2020)

IcyBergs said:


> Portrait photography especially if it's studio work with controlled lighting isn't very demanding task for a camera, and you don't need many of the specs you would be paying for with an R5 purchase.
> 
> My advice would be to buy a grey market new 5Ds for around $1100, you'll have an ideal studio camera and you will save a ton of money on buying clean used EF glass rather than new RF lenses with IQ that will meet or exceed your expectations.
> 
> You can own the 50mp 5DS a clean EF 85 1.4L, and 135L for less than $3k if you're a savvy buyer. That's a nice pro portrait kit.



Personally I am not a fan of the 5Ds and consider it a niche camera similar to the 1DX. He/She will end up with massive files that are huge overkill for a hobbyist in a studio and a camera body that is not great at much else. The 5DIV is a true hybrid camera and is more suitable to a wider range of scenarios.


----------



## IcyBergs (May 28, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Personally I am not a fan of the 5Ds and consider it a niche camera similar to the 1DX. He/She will end up with massive files that are huge overkill for a hobbyist in a studio and a camera body that is not great at much else. The 5DIV is a true hybrid camera and is more suitable to a wider range of scenarios.


I agree with you its a niche camera. But the niche is exactly the subject poster was interested in and can be had for half or less than the price of a 5DIV which may be more versatile but that does come at a cost.

I liked all the other suggestions but considering the price, the fact that its tailor made for studio work, and is very affordable someone needed to at least suggest it as an option for the poster.

Of course, I made no assumptions on the hardware for post processing, but an upgrade to a better chip in your laptop or desktop, and memory are some of the cheaper investments for a photography enthusiast.


----------



## ronaldzimmerman.nl (May 28, 2020)

I can’t wait to use the R5 + rumoured RF 100mm Macro L 2x. With this I don’t have to put my Raynox on the lens. 
A new radio trigger and radio flash with wireless second curtain flash would complete my dream setup! Maybe a R7 for extra magnification/reach would be nice.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 28, 2020)

stevelee said:


> When I bought my 6D2, I got the 24-105mm non-L kit lens, figuring it would hold me until I accumulated an arsenal of lenses to cover that range. I have been pleasantly surprised with how useful it is as an all-purpose lens. I have not missed having the extra stop or two at the upper end. With the low noise at higher ISOs I don't feel a need for fast lenses except when I want to blur backgrounds, etc. Besides saving a few bucks, I thought maybe the STM lens might be a little better suited for video, except I rarely shoot video so that wasn't much of an excuse. Of course your needs and interests could be much different from mine. If I were starting over, I wouldn't hesitate to get the f/4 L version, but really have no problems with the STM as my general purpose lens. My main point is that it is such a useful focal-length range, similar to what I'm used to on my travel cameras, the G7X II and now the G5X II.


Thanks for sharing. I think your right, I had the EF 24-105mm f4 BEFORE I got the R and I was happy with that lens and still happy with the RF version. I'm thinking more and more that the type of photography I do, whilst nice to have the extra stop of the RF24-70 I'm not sure I will have the situations that need it. I have the RF 70-200MM love the background blur when at f2.8 so I'll wait to see exactly how much the R5 is and then get out and start blasting away. You never know if I get out more, I might just expand my activities that mean the 24-70 might be warranted. Gives me more chance to save the pennies lol.


----------



## SteveC (May 28, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I think the UK is on a bunch of islands off the continent, so it depends upon what you mean by "Europe." They used to have holdings on the mainland, but that was a lot wars ago.



They still do, down at the southern end of Spain: Gibraltar. (But I know you were probably thinking of France, with the last such holding being Calais.)

In any case there's this tendency to assign every island to a continent. Iceland to Europe (even though part of it is geologically on the North American plate), Hawaii to North America (not even remotely true geologically, but politically it makes some sense), and so on.

There seems to be a trend towards assigning New Guinea to Australia, now, and not to Asia, which makes a good deal of sense. One could argue for assigning everything in Indonesia east of the Wallace line, but I doubt that will happen.


----------



## Ozarker (May 28, 2020)

schokuspokus said:


> What is the best alternative to the Canon R5/R6. Something less pricey but good enough for portrait photography.
> Would love to get the R5 but a prize of guessed 4299€ but the insane cost of the R glass makes photography extremely less fun for me.
> Love to have the best but this is in sum too much - as a hobby.
> Full frame in a small studio would be preferred but any input is welcome.


For portraits, the R is great. Same sensor as the 5D Mark IV and less money... with the added benefit of eye-AF. It works perfectly with EF lenses too. I've not used an RP, but I am sure it would also be great.


----------



## navastronia (May 28, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> For portraits, the R is great. Same sensor as the 5D Mark IV and less money... with the added benefit of eye-AF. It works perfectly with EF lenses too. I've not used an RP, but I am sure it would also be great.



The RP is great for portraits, of course. If missing focus bothers you immensely (as it does, me), the RP has terrific autofocus that's useful for both still and moving subjects.

EDIT: Other things about the RP: Good handling, easy to operate, and the sensor is okay


----------



## herein2020 (May 28, 2020)

IcyBergs said:


> I agree with you its a niche camera. But the niche is exactly the subject poster was interested in and can be had for half or less than the price of a 5DIV which may be more versatile but that does come at a cost.
> 
> I liked all the other suggestions but considering the price, the fact that its tailor made for studio work, and is very affordable someone needed to at least suggest it as an option for the poster.
> 
> Of course, I made no assumptions on the hardware for post processing, but an upgrade to a better chip in your laptop or desktop, and memory are some of the cheaper investments for a photography enthusiast.



Oh I agree, it definitely would fit the narrow scope of the poster's stated use case. I guess I was extrapolating a bit and thinking any hobbyist who spends $3K on a camera kit will want to step out of the studio with it as well; or at least I would. Even as a pro I try not to buy anything that will not work equally well on location as well (i.e. most of my studio strobes can be battery powered and I use them all the time for location shoots as well).


----------



## cayenne (May 28, 2020)

schokuspokus said:


> What is the best alternative to the Canon R5/R6. Something less pricey but good enough for portrait photography.
> Would love to get the R5 but a prize of guessed 4299€ but the insane cost of the R glass makes photography extremely less fun for me.
> Love to have the best but this is in sum too much - as a hobby.
> Full frame in a small studio would be preferred but any input is welcome.



You know...

You could be like many/most of us I"m guessing that will get one of the new "R" cameras and continue to shoot our perfectly good EF glass on there with the adapter.

You don't have to switch to RF glass just because you get a R camera.....

HTH,

C


----------



## stevelee (May 28, 2020)

SteveC said:


> They still do, down at the southern end of Spain: Gibraltar. (But I know you were probably thinking of France, with the last such holding being Calais.)


Oops, I forgot Gibraltar. And actually I was thinking back post Norman invasion. “King of France” was part of the English king’s title long after there was any territorial reality. That was before the U.K., I realize.

Then there are the Faulklands.


----------



## Jayk0607 (May 28, 2020)

BakaBokeh said:


> Canon 5DmkIV was $3499 at time of release in 2016.
> Accounting for cumulative inflation of 6.8% that would be $3,738.89 today*.
> 
> But inflation can't be the only indicator, because the 5D mkIII was also $3499 at release in 2012. That would give it a value of $3,908.46 in 2020*.
> ...



I made a quick chart showing the price with inflation (using https://www.usinflationcalculator.com). Yellow highlighted cell is the launch price and shows what the price is with inflation adjustments by the year of other releases.







Thing to note is, often times, especially with technology/electronic items, the trend does not follow the inflation model.


----------



## dcm (May 28, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> So how do you answer a ridiculous comment like "rip off Britain" without pointing out the different way taxes are listed on prices and the different things you get for those taxes?
> 
> Or more succinctly, how do you point out valid reasoning for quite different pricing structures worldwide without touching on broader issues? Or, how do you get people to stop comparing apples to oranges?
> 
> I was answering an often stated falsehood and have gotten 30 40 odd likes for doing it, I have been doing that all the time I have been here and I won't stop or apologize. Next time it will be about how "sensors with more pixels make more noise", or "a pro would never use that it's only got one card slot", "DR doesn't change with sensor size", "depth of field is constant and doesn't change with output size/viewing distance", "you can't handhold a camera with more than 35mp", "equivalence is a fallacy because you don't have to change iso", " there is no point in those MP because the lenses can't resolve it"..........



Might I suggest we compare pre-tax prices so we can avoid the whole tax/government discussion. In the US that means the listed price. Elsewhere we subtract the VAT/etc. tax from the listed price. For 17% VAT you would multiple the list price by 0.8547. Then you can apply exchange rates for comparison.


----------



## stevelee (May 28, 2020)

cayenne said:


> You know...
> 
> You could be like many/most of us I"m guessing that will get one of the new "R" cameras and continue to shoot our perfectly good EF glass on there with the adapter.
> 
> ...


But there are probably also others like me for whom the main (or only in my case) reason to buy an R-series camera would be so I could use R lenses. But since those lenses tend to exceed my price range and don’t meet any perceived unmet needs on my part, I don’t really fit the situation.


----------



## Random Orbits (May 28, 2020)

usern4cr said:


> Thanks, RandomOrbits, for your comments comparing the RF 24-70 f2.8 and RF 24-105 f4, as I am one of many who would have to decide which one (if any) to get. But I'd also like to ask you what you think about the upcoming RF 70-135 f2 option being thrown into the mix? Assuming you have the RF 24-70 f2.8, then would adding the RF 70-200 f2.8 still be the best 2 lens solution for you - versus adding the RF 70-135 f2 and also adding (or not getting) the 70-200 f2.8?  There's a lot of great options, but at a high enough cost that it may be hard to justify getting all 3. What do you think?



That is an interesting question, but I think the more relevant question is what is best telezoom to pick amongst the currently available RF 70-200 f/2.8 versus the upcoming RF 70-135 /f2 and the RF 100-500. The answer is going to depend on what other lenses you have in your kit and how you use your lenses. Between the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II and the 100-400 II, I used the 100-400 II more because my kids play soccer and for travel. The 70-200 was primarily a portrait and indoor lens. However, I got the 70-200 first and I used it for everything (even with the extenders). It's only when there multiple options to choose from that the 70-200 got less use.

I see a similar scenario playing out for the RF ecosystem. The RF 70-200 may be the best single lens choice, and it's reduction in stored length and weight makes it more portable than its EF counterpart (but it doesn't accept TCs anymore). However, if you plan on getting the 100-500 anyway, then the 70-200 becomes less important. Like the RF 28-70, I see the RF 70-135 as more of a niche lens. I'd expect it to be similar to the 70-200 in weight/size, so you're trading focal length range for a larger max aperture. The scenario that I'd make that trade most is for portraits and indoor stuff. Where the 70-135 f/2 gets interesting is that it's getting to max apertures of primes. The current L 135mm prime is f/2, and the RF 70-135 will get you there, so I can see Canon selling more RF 70-135s because people may use it like the 135 f/2L only with the flexibility of zooming. It'll be interesting to see if Canon releases a RF prime at 135mm. If so, I'd expect the max aperture to be faster the f/2, but what is the trade between aperture and cost? Sigma is at f/1.8 and that's only 1/3 of a stop, so I can't see that as being a big differentiator between a prime and a zoom. If Canon tries to go to f/1.4, then it'll cost a lot more (similar front element size to the EF 200 f/2 and EF 300 f/2.8).

In your case, if you're restricted by budget to a 2 zoom L lens solution, then it'll be based on the max focal length you need and get less expensive EF f/1.8 prime to adapt for portraits/indoors.


----------



## BakaBokeh (May 28, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Excellent points all, I could definitely see a possible scenario where mirrorless is cheaper to produce than the mirror. And finally, another forum member who takes into account inflation. One fact you missed though is currency exchange rates. Depending on where Canon sources the parts and the current and forecast exchange rates even they could affect what Canon is able to sell this camera at while remaining profitable.
> 
> I still think they will debut the body at $3999.00 then drop rapidly within the following year. One factor that may keep the price higher longer than it did for the EOS R is the fact that they had to develop an all new sensor, with the EOS R they were able to reuse the 5DIV's sensor so their R&D costs weren't as great.



That's true, but that can also said of other aspects of the R5. The research & development that went to the R body and RF mount system were borne by the EOS R. The R&D that went into the Digic X processor were borne by the 1DXmkIII. But still, the spec boost is so huge, I tend to agree with you that they can justify the $3999 price tag. And there is certainly precedence for the price drop.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 28, 2020)

sanj said:


> Canon RP if mirrorless. If DSLR then 6D. This was easy.


RP is a nice body and cheap too but what about the R, slightly higher MP count, better battery life?


----------



## SteveC (May 28, 2020)

stevelee said:


> Oops, I forgot Gibraltar. And actually I was thinking back post Norman invasion. “King of France” was part of the English king’s title long after there was any territorial reality. That was before the U.K., I realize.
> 
> Then there are the Faulklands.



Yeah, Calais was the very tail end of that whole Norman French Claim To The Throne business. As for the Falklands--well, the UK has a whole raft of overseas possessions still, mostly minor islands (the British Indian Ocean Territory being just one example). As do France, Spain and Portugal. Spain still owns a few coastal towns on the African Mediterranean coast, too. (And the US has both inhabited territories and uninhabited dots all over the Pacific, too.) France still has St. Pierre and Miquelon, just miles off Newfoundland.


----------



## BakaBokeh (May 28, 2020)

Jayk0607 said:


> I made a quick chart showing the price with inflation (using https://www.usinflationcalculator.com). Yellow highlighted cell is the launch price and shows what the price is with inflation adjustments by the year of other releases.
> 
> View attachment 190628
> 
> ...


What blows me away by that is what an amazing deal a 5DmkII was at launch.


----------



## SteveC (May 28, 2020)

stevelee said:


> But there are probably also others like me for whom the main (or only in my case) reason to buy an R-series camera would be so I could use R lenses. But since those lenses tend to exceed my price range and don’t meet any perceived unmet needs on my part, I don’t really fit the situation.



I'm probably a bit in both camps. I certainly intend to use my EF lenses on this camera (as I do on my M6-II); but I'm also certainly not averse to picking up some R lenses--including one as the kit lens. The one thing I'm not sure about is whether to get the 16-35 f/4 now (as an EF) or hope they'll do something RF with it soon. [I might even spring for the f/2.8.] (And of course I might decide I want to use that lens on my M6-II, so that would have to be the EF version.)


----------



## stevelee (May 28, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I'm probably a bit in both camps. I certainly intend to use my EF lenses on this camera (as I do on my M6-II); but I'm also certainly not averse to picking up some R lenses--including one as the kit lens. The one thing I'm not sure about is whether to get the 16-35 f/4 now (as an EF) or hope they'll do something RF with it soon. [I might even spring for the f/2.8.] (And of course I might decide I want to use that lens on my M6-II, so that would have to be the EF version.)


I love the 16-35 f/4, so it is hard to go wrong with it unless you have some overarching need for the extra stop. I never have missed it. Size, weight, and money all favor the f/4. I understand that the RF 15-35 is excellent optically as well.


----------



## Whowe (May 28, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I'm probably a bit in both camps. I certainly intend to use my EF lenses on this camera (as I do on my M6-II); but I'm also certainly not averse to picking up some R lenses--including one as the kit lens. The one thing I'm not sure about is whether to get the 16-35 f/4 now (as an EF) or hope they'll do something RF with it soon. [I might even spring for the f/2.8.] (And of course I might decide I want to use that lens on my M6-II, so that would have to be the EF version.)


I think we need to remember, even as good as RF Glass has been praised, most EF glass *is still* excellent and industry leading. It's not like it is a major step back. (Except for the new RF glass that has no EF equivalent, such as 28-70 f/2...) So it can and will fill a lot of needs, including people stepping up to R that can't afford to buy RF glass now and people that want to maintain flexibility with existing cameras, both dslr and M series.


----------



## sanj (May 28, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> RP is a nice body and cheap too but what about the R, slightly higher MP count, better battery life?


R is obviously better. I was suggesting cheaper options. And 5D4 is better than 6D. I would say much better actually.


----------



## herein2020 (May 28, 2020)

Whowe said:


> I think we need to remember, even as good as RF Glass has been praised, most EF glass *is still* excellent and industry leading. It's not like it is a major step back. (Except for the new RF glass that has no EF equivalent, such as 28-70 f/2...) So it can and will fill a lot of needs, including people stepping up to R that can't afford to buy RF glass now and people that want to maintain flexibility with existing cameras, both dslr and M series.



I'm still all in on my EF glass and have no plans to replace it with RF. The PITA for me right now is the sheer number of mounts I'm stuck supporting due to the wide variety of work I do:

I have EF, MFT, and APS-C glass which makes my kit messier than I would like. I may replace my T6s timelapse body with the RP and hopefully my GH5 with the R6 which would let me consolidate around just RF and EF. The problem with the RP (and any mirrorless) is that it has nowhere near the battery life of the T6s which is why I'm still on the fence.


----------



## H. Jones (May 28, 2020)

Whowe said:


> I think we need to remember, even as good as RF Glass has been praised, most EF glass *is still* excellent and industry leading. It's not like it is a major step back. (Except for the new RF glass that has no EF equivalent, such as 28-70 f/2...) So it can and will fill a lot of needs, including people stepping up to R that can't afford to buy RF glass now and people that want to maintain flexibility with existing cameras, both dslr and M series.


My exact thoughts as I begin to move towards RF glass for the R5. 

I don't see myself replacing my EF glass at the moment unless there's a real need or I totally move to the RF system after the R1. But my eye is immediately set on three RF lenses: 


35mm 1.8 
Small and compact to use the R5 like a Fuji X100 on steroids

28-70mm f/2L 
To use in my paid work covering breaking news at night, where F/2 would be a huge step up over my 24-70. ISO 6400 is *far* better than 12,800.

RF 70-200
Low priority over the EF 70-200, but at that size would make it far easier to keep a 70-200 in a small bag on me outside of work, but difficult to justify the cost when my 1dx2 will have my long EF glass on paid work, paired with the R5 on a wide.

Outside of that, I would be interested in getting an RF 85mm f/1.4L if they ever release it, to have a portrait lens. I'd get the EF 85mm 1.4L IS but I'd prefer to spend money on RF glass going forward.


----------



## AEWest (May 28, 2020)

H. Jones said:


> My exact thoughts as I begin to move towards RF glass for the R5.
> 
> I don't see myself replacing my EF glass at the moment unless there's a real need or I totally move to the RF system after the R1. But my eye is immediately set on three RF lenses:
> 
> ...


There is the new Samyang 85 1.4 that has just been announced for RF mount. And it does have autofocus. It also happens to have, coincidentally, a red ring around the barrel.

I hope it is an indication that there will be viable native mount alternatives to expensive Canon RF lenses in the future.


----------



## H. Jones (May 28, 2020)

AEWest said:


> There is the new Samyang 85 1.4 that has just been announced for RF mount. And it does have autofocus. It also happens to have, coincidentally, a red ring around the barrel.
> 
> I hope it is an indication that there will be viable native mount alternatives to expensive Canon RF lenses in the future.



As nice as third party options are, as a Platinum Canon Professional Services member I always stick to entirely Canon gear knowing if anything breaks Canon will get it back to me in two days. Can't stress how impeccable CPS is and how much of an asset it's been to me. I've broken my 5d3, 1dx2, 24-70(twice), and 35mm in the line of work and every time I've sent things on a Monday it gets back to me that Wednesday with free shipping and a 30% discount. Easily one of the biggest reasons I've never considered switching brands.

That said, I totally agree and hope there are more third party lens options since it would definitely help grow the overall appeal of the R system and give more access to the system to consumers.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 28, 2020)

dcm said:


> Might I suggest we compare pre-tax prices so we can avoid the whole tax/government discussion. In the US that means the listed price. Elsewhere we subtract the VAT/etc. tax from the listed price. For 17% VAT you would multiple the list price by 0.8547. Then you can apply exchange rates for comparison.


That doesn‘t take import duties and tariffs into account so is just as useless. Whatever some people might think or have been told about tariffs the truth is they are a direct end user tax. Now there might be all kinds of genuinely good reasons for the duty/tariff/pre sales tax tax, but we can’t hope to work all that out.

I wonder what the difference is in FOB price is, if any, for the various Canon distributors/importers when they purchase direct from Canon Japan, indeed shipping, insurance, distribution, import fees and duties, clearances, transportation, storage, and then redistribution are all factors the importer pays for not the exporter. If fuel is more expensive in one country than another then even if all else was equal the customer cost would have to be adjusted for the fuel used in the importation and distribution of the item.


----------



## biggiep (May 28, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Why do people insist on saying this every time a price for anything is mentioned? UK prices are listed inclusive of tax USA prices are not. In the UK the health service is included in your tax bill, in the USA it is not, personally I'd pay a few hundred dollars more each time I bought a camera and got health insurance included, in the USA you 'save' a few hundred dollars on the cost of your camera and spend $500 every single month on health insurance because "Freedom".



You pay way more than just a few hundred dollars on camera purchases for your nationalized healthcare. If you're going to mock our system in the US at least be more forthcoming about the actual costs in your society.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 29, 2020)

biggiep said:


> You pay way more than just a few hundred dollars on camera purchases for your nationalized healthcare. If you're going to mock our system in the US at least be more forthcoming about the actual costs in your society.


Any way you reason it the cost of healthcare in the USA is 250% per person that of the UK for an inferior outcome, to me that isn’t a mocking or political comment just a statement of fact and it doesn’t matter where the money comes from, either direct payment or indirect taxes, it’s the same thing.

My original point was compare apples to apples not apples to oranges, there are fees and taxes in the list price in the UK that are not in the list price of the same product in the USA.

As I am a tax paying USA resident I feel I am qualified to mock the systems of both the USA and the UK, my homeland, not that I was mocking anything, I just feel I am qualified...


----------



## David - Sydney (May 29, 2020)

Starting out [URL='http://i.viglink.com/?key=4d330a4797ea127575531d3ebd1213b0&insertId=094b85271733f51d&type=KW&exp=60%3ACI1C55A%3A2&libId=karhx6o60100y11i000DAh8ccmdp0&loc=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.canonrumors.com%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fthreads%2Fcanon-eos-r5-launch-price-will-be-below-4000-usd-cr3.38606%2Fpage-19&v=1&iid=094b85271733f51d&out=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bhphotovideo.com%2Fc%2Fproduct%2F1433710-REG%2Fcanon_eos_r_mirrorless_digital.html&ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.canonrumors.com%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fthreads%2Fcanon-eos-r5-launch-price-will-be-below-4000-usd-cr3.38606%2Fpage-18&title=Canon%20EOS%20R5%20launch%20price%20will%20be%20below%20%244000%20USD%20%5BCR3%5D%20%7C%20Canon%20Rumors&txt=%3Cspan%3EEOS%20%3C%2Fspan%3E%3Cspan%3ER%3C%2Fspan%3E']EOS R[/URL] said:


> Looking at your kit, I have a similar set up, EOS R, 24-105MM f4 & 70-200MM F2.8 &I've been thinking about swapping the 24-105 for the 28-70mm for the extra aperture. Do you find you have to swap lenses often as there is no overlap?


I was also considering whether to get the RF24-105mm or not (and sell my EF24-105mm L mark 1) but I realised that I do have different use cases. 24-105mm for walk around and for indoor sports where there is a lot of movement at variable distance (eg karate sparing where everyone is on the floor at the same time) with the ISO cranked up. If I have space, then I will take the 70-200mm f/2.8 and the 16-35mm f/4 for coverage in any situation... groups with the wide angle eg churches where you might not have a lot of distance with lots of people and telephoto for closeups of couples/babies etc. I can't justify the RF15-35mm as I will always need some depth of field for groups and the quality of the EF16-35 f/4 is excellent. My land/seascapes with higher apertures don't need f/2.8 and my 77mm filter set fits both telephoto and wide angle. Lots of extra cost to move the the RF wide angle for me. I will probably get the (probable) RF24-105mm kit with the R5 and sell my EF24-105mm.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 29, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> That doesn‘t take import duties and tariffs into account so is just as useless. Whatever some people might think or have been told about tariffs the truth is they are a direct end user tax. Now there might be all kinds of genuinely good reasons for the duty/tariff/pre sales tax tax, but we can’t hope to work all that out.
> 
> I wonder what the difference is in FOB price is, if any, for the various Canon distributors/importers when they purchase direct from Canon Japan, indeed shipping, insurance, distribution, import fees and duties, clearances, transportation, storage, and then redistribution are all factors the importer pays for not the exporter. If fuel is more expensive in one country than another then even if all else was equal the customer cost would have to be adjusted for the fuel used in the importation and distribution of the item.


Not to quibble a lot but 
"Since Incoterms 1980 introduced the Incoterm FCA, FOB should only be used for non-containerized seafreight and inla"nd waterway transport. However, FOB is commonly used incorrectly for all modes of transport despite the contractual risks that this can introduce. In some common law countries such as the United States of America, FOB is not only connected with the carriage of goods by sea but also used for inland carriage aboard any "vessel, car or other vehicle.""
Since we are referring to international countries/shipments then FCA or more recently DAP is more commonly used for airfreight.

It would be rare for high cost/relatively small electronic devices to be shipped by sea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incoterms#FOB_–_Free_on_Board_(named_port_of_shipment)


----------



## stevelee (May 29, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I personally tip well over 15%, especially on a small check, or if they seemed to be busting their tails. Back in the day you could get a very cheap $4 lunch at some restaurants (that would make it up for dinner which would be $12 or so), I'd tip as though paying "normal" price not the cut rate lunch price; I'd tip a couple of dollars.
> 
> I've been "bitten" by not understanding customary tipping in other places. I fear on my last overseas trip I pissed off a lot of the locals because I was under the impression there was no tipping. And even when someone suggested I should tip so-and-so, I fear that I tipped too little. I have no idea. It was "third world," though, so the money I tipped might have been HUGE to them, for all I know.



Our restaurants have just started back table service outdoors (great this lovely spring) and limited service indoors. I'm still doing curbside pick up. When I phone the order in, I tell them to add $3 or $5 to the credit card bill for the tip, so we don't have to pass stuff back and forth. That comes out to more than I would have tipped normally even with table service, say 20% and round up, minimum. I've supported the restaurants along to keep them in business, and hoped I helped keep their limited staff solvent.

I've spent very limited time in third world countries, depending upon one's definitions, and even then usually not going independently to restaurants. Wherever I go, I read the guidebook on tipping customs. In much of Europe, service is included in the menu price or at least added to the check when you get it. If the service is decent, the custom is to round up the payment, and add in a little more to show extra appreciation. In Italy last fall I thought cab rides were very cheap by our standards, even in Rome. I'd throw in an extra euro or two, more if they handled our bags, and would in any event round up to €10. Drivers almost always acted surprised at the amount when I'd say "No change." Maybe that was an act. Perhaps the ones who didn't were afraid I didn't mean to tip that much and hoped I wouldn't notice until they drove away. In any event, we all seemed happy with the service and the transaction.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 29, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> It would be rare for high cost/relatively small electronic devices to be shipped by sea.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incoterms#FOB_–_Free_on_Board_(named_port_of_shipment)


There is enough evidence to support the idea that Canon do trans ocean shipments via shipping container. When the West coast ports had unloading issues/strikes there were shortages of Canon stock.

But by and large I love a quibble, well done Sir.


----------



## gmon750 (May 29, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Luckily my Ikelite housing fits 5Diii/iv/SR so upgrading from iii to second hand iv meant I didn't need a new housing. That said, I will be moving to a new R5 Ikelite housing when it is available.
> Touch screen is great especially for moving the focus point but no use underwater. The Ikelite housing doesn't support joystick movement so it will be interesting to see how tracking works without these 2 options. IBIS + IS stabilization will be very welcome!
> Second hand housings aren't worth much though unfortunately :-(



I use an Aquatica 5D housing. I do know it will work with.a 5DM4, but I feel I've maxed-out the 5D model for the type of underwater photography I do. In addition to typical ocean photography, I do professional underwater modeling/portraits and many times I fill my 5D's buffer. A 5DM4 will provide a minor improvement, so I'm ready for something more robust. 

The fact the R5 ditches touch-bar from the original R-body is a plus to me specifically because of underwater housings.


----------



## stevelee (May 29, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> In your case, if you're restricted by budget to a 2 zoom L lens solution, then it'll be based on the max focal length you need and get less expensive EF f/1.8 prime to adapt for portraits/indoors.



When Canon was running discounts on refurbs, I bought the 85mm f/1.8 for very little money. I have been very pleased with it. It is perfect for portraits. Tuesday I needed to shoot a video of myself to send to the church in my neighborhood for their pre-recorded service Sunday. (It will be Pentecost Sunday, so they wanted readings from Acts 2 in a variety of languages. My assignment was to read the original Greek. It was a fairly long passage with tongue twisters like αποφθέγγεσθαι.) I used the 85mm and auto camera settings. I was sitting in a chair by the window and had nice, soft, even light coming in from my right. I wore a bright red (for Pentecost) college sweatshirt. I knew the focal length would be flattering, but was afraid it might put the camera too far away for the audio, since I don't have an external mike. But both sound and picture turned out great. And of course intelligibility was not a big priority anyway.

For my T3i, I got the 50mm f/1.4 lens to do portraits. When I got the 6D2, I used the 100mm macro f/2.8. If anything, it looked a little too sharp, almost clinical. I like the 85mm portrait results much better. They still look sharp. And I have photographed plenty of people with the 24-105mm zoom with good results, just not as much selective focus. It probably would have worked for my video just as well, but I thought the f/1.8 would give the camera more options for auto exposure without my having to think through anything. After typing that, I realize that if I want to shoot with a 100mm lens, I have three options, the macro, the kit zoom, and the 100-400mm zoom, and the 85mm is pretty close, too. Different lenses for different uses.


----------



## sanj (May 29, 2020)

stevelee said:


> When Canon was running discounts on refurbs, I bought the 85mm f/1.8 for very little money. I have been very pleased with it. It is perfect for portraits. Tuesday I needed to shoot a video of myself to send to the church in my neighborhood for their pre-recorded service Sunday. (It will be Pentecost Sunday, so they wanted readings from Acts 2 in a variety of languages. My assignment was to read the original Greek. It was a fairly long passage with tongue twisters like αποφθέγγεσθαι.) I used the 85mm and auto camera settings. I was sitting in a chair by the window and had nice, soft, even light coming in from my right. I wore a bright red (for Pentecost) college sweatshirt. I knew the focal length would be flattering, but was afraid it might put the camera too far away for the audio, since I don't have an external mike. But both sound and picture turned out great. And of course intelligibility was not a big priority anyway.
> 
> For my T3i, I got the 50mm f/1.4 lens to do portraits. When I got the 6D2, I used the 100mm macro f/2.8. If anything, it looked a little too sharp, almost clinical. I like the 85mm portrait results much better. They still look sharp. And I have photographed plenty of people with the 24-105mm zoom with good results, just not as much selective focus. It probably would have worked for my video just as well, but I thought the f/1.8 would give the camera more options for auto exposure without my having to think through anything. After typing that, I realize that if I want to shoot with a 100mm lens, I have three options, the macro, the kit zoom, and the 100-400mm zoom, and the 85mm is pretty close, too. Different lenses for different uses.


It would be nice if you post a clip or at least a still grab!


----------



## HarryFilm (May 29, 2020)

No matter what ANYONE says (be you a Sony, Fuji, Nikon, Pentax or Canon Fanboi or FanGirl!), this camera is gonna be GREAT!

Again, with its 30 fps 8K video, you have a 30 frames per second BURST RATE Stills Camera that takes 35 Megapixel Shots! How can ANYONE be railing against that sort of SHEER IMAGING POWER ???

It has DPAF. It's got some AWESOME high quality FAST GLASS and THE ONLY THING MISSING NOW is an f/4 to f/5.6 (or faster!) native Canon R-mount 150 to 650mm Sports Zoom Lens to make it PERFECT for sports/fast action/wildlife!

At $3949 US, we'll be buying them in bulk for our multi-location AV employees and I just might sneak-purchase an R5 for myself since I can't take our big MF babies home yet! While MANY are drooling for an upcoming ruggedized True Pro-level R1 mirrorless camera, that may take a while so the R5 might work just fine for now! Like I said when it's $3949 US you can't complain! The Sony A7r4 is dead in the water at that price! Even Canon is going to be surprised how many people are going to be buying this camera for the DPAF being available in 8K video modes so it can be used as a 35 megapixel, 30 fps burst rate stills camera! You can NOW IMAGINE at just how INSANELY GREAT the eventually coming R1 True Pro Mirrorless will be!

---

Anyways.... for your photo pleasures, take a gander below at what can be done with a $60 used Nokia Smartphone from 2014!

Soooooooo, IMAGINE what the Canon R5, a pro-level Canon R1 ....AND.... a 50.3 megapixel Large Sensor Global Shutter MF mirrorless camera can do ????

V


----------



## stevelee (May 29, 2020)

sanj said:


> It would be nice if you post a clip or at least a still grab!



I'll spare you my stumbling through Koine Greek, so here is just a screen grab the video, compressed to a JPEG. I might post here or somewhere a link to the church's finished product for anybody who wants to see how they put all this together.


----------



## myplanet (May 29, 2020)

EF glass will still more than get the job done, I have bought one RF lens, the 24-105 f/4 as it was actually cheaper than the EF. Otherwise, I've been buying up EF L lenses. It's been said that the RF benefits are on the wide side, not the telephoto, based on the physics. 

As far as battery life, the screen is what chews up battery life, just as it does if you are shooting in live mode, so I don't know that I would let battery life be a dealbreaker.


----------



## David - Sydney (May 29, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> There is enough evidence to support the idea that Canon do trans ocean shipments via shipping container. When the West coast ports had unloading issues/strikes there were shortages of Canon stock.
> 
> But by and large I love a quibble, well done Sir.


Let's hope that 6 week sea freight shipments will not delay the R5 deliveries then or perhaps mishaps like these 40 containers lost off the coast of Sydney. Rather than cameras on the beaches, they were PPE :-(
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05...-washes-ashore-from-apl-england-ship/12291416


----------



## David - Sydney (May 29, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> I use an Aquatica 5D housing. I do know it will work with.a 5DM4, but I feel I've maxed-out the 5D model for the type of underwater photography I do. In addition to typical ocean photography, I do professional underwater modeling/portraits and many times I fill my 5D's buffer. A 5DM4 will provide a minor improvement, so I'm ready for something more robust.
> 
> The fact the R5 ditches touch-bar from the original R-body is a plus to me specifically because of underwater housings.


Despite the constant message that the 5Div was a minor improvement, I was pleasantly surprised how much of a difference it made as an overall package... and for a relatively small changeover cost from a 5Diii to a second hand 5Div.


----------



## sanj (May 29, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I'll spare you my stumbling through Koine Greek, so here is just a screen grab the video, compressed to a JPEG. I might post here or somewhere a link to the church's finished product for anybody who wants to see how they put all this together.
> 
> View attachment 190639


Well done sir. Thank you.


----------



## tomtomtom (May 29, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> At the end of the day everyone has to make money to stay in business and Canon is no different. Neither you nor I know the amount of R&D that went into developing this camera, the cost of its ....
> 
> If you think making money selling images is very difficult imagine trying to make money selling cameras. If you want a less expensive gadget then just buy a less expensive camera...



Wow dude! D'you actually work for Canon? I'm trying to point out that the market changed dramatically, in order to sell the price has to be right. I'm not talking just about Canon. My kit ain't cheap bruv, I'm just not 100% convinced it's worth all that money. I know a lot of people who think the same way. DSLRs age very quickly, too quickly. It's not about how much you spend but what you get. Camera manufacturers want you to spend 4k+ for a semi-pro body every 4 years; roughly. And now change a system as well. Given the economy, the technology and, most of all, the way people consume photography 4k price tag dramatically limits your sales volume. Higher price will not make up for it. It's simple. If this continues the camera as we know it, DSLR, will extinct because of greed of the likes of Canon. 

It should actually be well below 3k. Well below. Producing 7D, 7.5D, 6.25D etc will not help either.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

edoorn said:


> I'm sure it focusses excellent. However, the 1dX III does not have animal eye or face detect in live view.
> 
> And FWIW, I do think that for face or eye tracking, on sensor focussing can surpass what's possible with an OVF. I think we've sort of hit the limit there.



It most certainly does have face detect in LV. Canon calls it "head detect" because it will stay locked on the head of a person even when they spin around so that the face is looking away from the camera.

Those who have used it also say it *does* focus consistently on the eyes of animals, especially when used in Live View. Who cares if the marketing department does or does not give it a certain label, as long as it does what you wish it to do?


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Steve Balcombe said:


> Exactly .



This just breaking...

Water is still wet! 

We now return you to your regular programming.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

edoorn said:


> sorry, I meant animal eye and animal face and body detect.



Again, those who actually use the EOS 1D X Mark III to shoot birds and other animals say it locks onto the eyes of birds and animals very consistently in LV. Who cares what the marketing department calls it?


----------



## herein2020 (May 29, 2020)

tomtomtom said:


> Wow dude! D'you actually work for Canon? I'm trying to point out that the market changed dramatically, in order to sell the price has to be right. I'm not talking just about Canon. My kit ain't cheap bruv, I'm just not 100% convinced it's worth all that money. I know a lot of people who think the same way. DSLRs age very quickly, too quickly. It's not about how much you spend but what you get. Camera manufacturers want you to spend 4k+ for a semi-pro body every 4 years; roughly. And now change a system as well. Given the economy, the technology and, most of all, the way people consume photography 4k price tag dramatically limits your sales volume. Higher price will not make up for it. It's simple. If this continues the camera as we know it, DSLR, will extinct because of greed of the likes of Canon.
> 
> It should actually be well below 3k. Well below. Producing D7, D7.5, D6.25 etc will not help either.



I definitely do not work for Canon, and I totally get your points that the market changed drastically but I do not get your correlation between the market and the cost of producing the camera. Basically it seems like you are saying the camera should cost $3,000 but with no reference point for your statement. The fact is Canon does produce camera bodies at every price point on the spectrum, so if this one seems overpriced to you then they have plenty of other options to choose from.

For example, if it cost Canon $3600 to make this camera body how could they possibly sell it for $3,000? If it did cost them $3600 to make it (totally theoretical figure by the way) then how would a pandemic, shrinking customer base, shorter camera body lifespan, or any other factor that you mentioned decrease the cost of producing that body to the point to where they could sell it for $3,000?

My two main points are that Canon already has plenty of cheaper bodies (definitely more FF bodies than ever before) and nothing that you have mentioned so far (pandemic, shrinking customer base, faster R&D cycles, etc) would decrease the production cost of the camera.

This is why I bring up the S1H and the cost of the RF lenses when pricing discussions arise. Both Canon and Panasonic know more about the current market realities than everyone on this forum put together yet they still chose to price their products at what can be considered a premium compared to the competition. This is my reference point for stating that they probably simply cannot go any lower without losing money on every sale and is the main reason why I think the R5 will be $3999 at least at launch.

Now what Canon may do is reduce the number of bodies they produce in the future due to the lack of customer revenue, lengthen their R&D times, maybe even just make fewer higher end bodies; to me those would all be more logical responses to the market conditions that you mentioned but for the R5 the production cost is already there and Canon has no choice but to try to recover it which is probably at a price point well above $3K USD.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> Hopefully you are and are able to take advantage of B&H’s PayBoo card. Saves me hundreds of dollars a year.



If B&H is absorbing the cost of paying sales tax to states without listing it on the invoice, it's affecting their net revenue generated by the transaction and has to be made up somewhere. They're probably hoping I won't pay the balance off in time and they get to charge me high interest on the unpaid balance. In the end, it seems what they are effectively doing is getting away with charging less than the Canon allowed minimum advertised price!

If Canon sets the minimum advertised price at $1,999 for an item and B&H sells it to me for $1,999 +$159.92 sales tax = $2,158.92 and then rebates me $159.92 on the credit card statement I've sent them $1,999. They'll keep $1,839.08 and send my state $159.92 on their monthly or quarterly sales tax report.


----------



## Ozarker (May 29, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I'll spare you my stumbling through Koine Greek, so here is just a screen grab the video, compressed to a JPEG. I might post here or somewhere a link to the church's finished product for anybody who wants to see how they put all this together.
> 
> View attachment 190639


1st century Greek was my toughest class at Union University in Jackson, Tennessee. You did very well!


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Billybob said:


> Since the 9 is the speed camera and the 7R is the hi res line, it looks like you reversed your comparisons (the Sony 7 line tops out at 10 fps and the 9 has a max resolution of 24MP).



The α9 also tops out at 10 fps when using a mechanical shutter. 20 FPS is only available with electronic shutter (and the rolling shutter effect) with a fairly short list of Sony lenses. A few other Sony lenses reduce the max frame rate to around 15 fps with electronic shutter. The rest limit the camera to around 10 fps, even when using electronic shutter or when using adapted non-Sony lenses.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

justaCanonuser said:


> Yeah, that's so breathtakingly impressive, given an EOS 5D IV has "only" 30 MP. The option to extract such highly resolved stills from video will blast also fast frame stills shooting into a new era. Mouthwatering in particular for wildlife, I have to say.





SecureGSM said:


> At what shutter speed those video frames are being taken? Is that 1/1000s or faster?



One will have to shoot the video with the intention of only using it for frame grabs if they wish to use a "sports rated" exposure time. At 1/1000 second video will look very choppy. If they use "video rated" exposure times/180° shutter angle, then frame grabs will suffer immensely from subject motion blur.


----------



## Ozarker (May 29, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> I definitely do not work for Canon, and I totally get your points that the market changed drastically but I do not get your correlation between the market and the cost of producing the camera. Basically it seems like you are saying the camera should cost $3,000 but with no reference point for your statement. The fact is Canon does produce camera bodies at every price point on the spectrum, so if this one seems overpriced to you then they have plenty of other options to choose from.
> 
> For example, if it cost Canon $3600 to make this camera body how could they possibly sell it for $3,000? If it did cost them $3600 to make it (totally theoretical figure by the way) then how would a pandemic, shrinking customer base, shorter camera body lifespan, or any other factor that you mentioned decrease the cost of producing that body to the point to where they could sell it for $3,000?
> 
> ...


If anything, in my opinion, the pandemic has increased Canon's costs. Increased losses too. There are always those who scream "GREED!". I'll never understand it. Usually it is those complaining and being greedy... demanding a product for a price *they* have determined is fair without any knowledge of the company's costs. It makes me laugh every time.

I used to have a son-in-law that would brag about his pirated copies of movies and software he'd bought at a fraction of the retail price for genuine legitimate product. He was always saying that, "those greedy corporations have enough money and they should be giving it away." SMH The guy never could hold a job and was always looking for someone to sue. Glad he's out of the picture.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

cayenne said:


> Well, for sure they are trying to tighten up all the holes...BUT....to date, they have not tightened them up everywhere yet.
> 
> 
> And even on Amazon,.....if you buy from 3rd party sellers (not talking just cameras here, but anything) they often still do not charge sales tax, it is primarily only on items sold by Amazon that gets tax added.



I've noticed more and more of the third party sellers on amazon are also beginning to charge sales tax, probably because states have been successfully going after some of the worst offenders in highly publicized cases.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

cayenne said:


> A week or two ago from B&H....why?
> 
> And no...I did not use any sort of Payboo or whatever you're talking about either...used my own CCs....sometimes visa some times Apple Pay, whichever I get the most % cash back with....
> 
> But no special cards, no house accounts and no "rebates"...they simply did not charge sales tax, nor did they charge shipping since it was over their min. purchase for free shipping which I think is like $49?



So you are either in one of the five states, covering only 2.5% of the U.S. population between all of them, that have no retail sales tax or you're in one of the remaining six states that have not yet passed legislation requiring out of state retailers to collect some form of sales tax on items shipped to consumers in their state. In either case, you're in the shrinking minority among U.S. citizens.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

"pdbgrafx, post: 833985, member: 15161"

I see where you quoted my comment, but I do not see where you added any sort of reply.

What's your point?


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Obsolete entirely no. High mechanical FPS is required in some applications. Primarily use to increase the odds of "getting the shot". You're talking about consumers and amateurs. Get real. "Any camera can be a sports shooter". Yeah if shooting family or friends and for recreational purposes. I have been shooting professionally assignment and freelance for over two decades. ALL cameras are niche devices. Period. The majority of camera operators that I know, do not solely shoot one and only one genre. Network connection, FPS being the primary reason. And it being supplied and paid for the other reason. To get THE shot. Those that already have name and recognition have the ability to get THE shot regardless if using the 5D or the 1Dx. If you know the sport and the coreographed movements you can get the shot with either device. I know. because I have owned both. When shooting in Rio in 2016, I rarely took the 1dxII to any venues. I rarely returned directly to the hotel following. The hefty 1dx2 was not the item to be with at 2am. The entire start of any world class sprint race is only 0- 20m and only 15 strides. This is within 2.5 seconds including the 110m hurdle touchdown. Yes, the 5dmk3 is capable of getting all those strides from the worlds fastest humans from the blocks to the 20m point. If you know what you're doing and not merely pressing the shutter. As many do (spray & pray). When one is being paid and provided with the device to increase the odds of "getting the shot" and are tasked with shooting multiple events, they chose the 1dx for reliability. Skill, knowledge of the craft and of the event is the equalizer. While assisting in the development of Olympic track coach athletes, I have acquired the skill to get the shot file most easier with knowledge of the correographed & predetermined movements. Either device fits the application. With skill they are interchangeable for the application. Both appropriate for the task. It's done on a regular basis. Professionally.



What a lot of folks who pray and spray at high frame rates fail to consider is that even at 20 fps there are 50 milliseconds between each frame. If the exposure time is 1/1000 then only one millisecond is being exposed for any particular spot on the sensor and it typically only takes about 2.5 milliseconds for the shutter curtains in a top end sports camera such as the 1D X or Nikon D4/5 to transit the entire sensor. The other 47.5 milliseconds between each frame are not recorded at all! 

No matter how fast one's frame rate is, it still takes either impeccable timing or blind dumb luck to get THE shot.


----------



## Quackator (May 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Do you find you have to swap lenses often as there is no overlap?



Ask 5 photographers, get 7 opinions.

Shooting live shows and corporate events, I found that the 
RF 2.8/15-35mm and the Sigma 1.8/135mm ART, each on
a separate body did everything I needed.

I could leave the rest of the gear literally chained to a wall
and never bothered to get one of the other lenses.

Yes, there is a gap between 35 and 135mm.
I found this to be no problem for me.
Anticipate the action, be there before it happens, 
and you need much less zoom in the end.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

6degrees said:


> Canon EOS 5D Mark IV : $2,499.00
> Canon EOS R: $1,799.00
> Sony a7iIV: $3,498.
> 
> If Canon R5 is above $3500, it will be a tough sell.



5D Mark IV at launch in 2016: $3,499 USD 
EOS R at launch in 2018: $2,299 USD
Sony α7r IV at launch in 2020: $3,499

$3,499 USD in 2016 is worth $3,737.83 USD today.
$2,299 USD in 2018 is worth $2,346.21 USD today.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Normalnorm said:


> IOW, if you are poor it is your fault?
> 
> Sorry but you have not seen much of the world if you believe people making poor wages are not trying hard enough.
> This is a foundational narrative of the "prosperity gospel" and the moral failure narrative of the poor. Thus we have punitive policies directed at poor families that are allegedly aimed at "incentivizing" them to greater effort when in fact serve to add more pain to a family already struggling. It erects barriers to education, health care, mental health and the other opportunities taken for granted by the more fortunate.



On the other hand, "much of the world" was not included in a conversation about how much _*wait staff in the U.S.*_ are compensated.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

geffy said:


> the thing is the start up price is irrelevant as supply will be less than demand and people like me never buy in the first year anyway and its not just cost, i want to make sure its ok first as i am not sending back for fixes



Well, sort of. But as long as demand outstrips supply, the introductory price will rule. If production issues last well into 2021, then they'll still be getting the introductory list price when you might be ready to buy.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

David_E said:


> That is a Trumpian “alternative fact,” i.e., a bare-faced lie.



I've worked in situations where people were giving maximum effort and producing effective results and still weren't getting paid what they should.

I've also worked in situations where people were either not cut out for a specific job or refused to give much of any effort and then liked to blame everyone else except themselves for their failure.

Sometimes it is true that people bring unwanted consequences onto themselves due to bad decisions they make.
Sometimes it is true that unwanted consequences are forced on people no matter how much effort they put forth.

Just because one happens in some places does not mean that the other doesn't happen in other places.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Jayk0607 said:


> Both Adorama and B&H have collected tax from me. I'm in CA. But regardless of whether vendor collects the tax or not, you still have to report and pay at the end of the year.



If the vendor collects tax from you, then you do not have to pay it again, do you? Isn't the receipt more or less documentation of a tax credit that you've already paid in that regard?


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

ddixon said:


> ...and in TN, Amazon and B&H charge state sales tax (9.25% in my location) but B&H offers the Payboo option to avoid it. However, Adorama still does not charge state sales tax.



The Payboo option does not avoid it. The states for which B&H collect sales tax still get paid that sales tax by B&H. B&H just gives you a rebate, at their expense, for the tax they collected from you and paid to your state.

Adorama charged me sales tax on an order last year. YMMV depending on in which state you live.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said:


> Yes, you should become realistic.
> 
> $3500 is my guess, but $3000 would be like next winter's holiday prices.
> 
> Being realistic means realizing that the R5 will be like nothing else on the market.



IMHO we won't see an R5 from an authorized dealer for $3,000 until holiday season 2022 at the earliest. 

If it intros at $3,500-3,800 and production issues due to COVID-19 and the resulting economic fallout keep demand well ahead of supply, then holiday season 2021 will have little or no discount on the R5. It's rare for Canon to discount their top tier bodies and lenses during holiday promotions until almost the end of that product's lifespan. They typically go after the mass market by offering holiday discounts on their more consumer oriented gear.


----------



## Quackator (May 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> RP is a nice body and cheap too but what about the R, slightly higher MP count, better battery life?



Actually I had hoped the R would be what now the R5 turns out to be.
Test drove the R for a week, and while the technical results were impeccable,
I found the ergonomics repulsive.

Badly wanted the RF 15-35mm though, so I settled for the RP as
an interim solution. Found it surprisingly smooth in ergonomics
and will likely keep it even after two R5 have entered the house.

So yes, the technical results from the R will be better (dynamic range, 
to name the most important), but it handles very uncomfortable.

YMMV.


----------



## Quackator (May 29, 2020)

myplanet said:


> As far as battery life, the screen is what chews up battery life, (...)



Unfortunately my experience is that the EVF drains the 
battery faster than the back LCD on the RP.

Battery eliminators and V-lock batteries solve this problem
if you really need uninterrupted operation over a longer time.


----------



## derpderp (May 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Looking at your kit, I have a similar set up, EOS R, 24-105MM f4 & 70-200MM F2.8 &I've been thinking about swapping the 24-105 for the 28-70mm for the extra aperture. Do you find you have to swap lenses often as there is no overlap?



Not particularly, since for my style of photography (portrait/travel/street), I tend to use the 28-70mm 80% of the time, whereas the 70-200mm would come in for those special situations when I can't get close enough to the subject, or that I want more compression.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

BakaBokeh said:


> Canon 5DmkIV was $3499 at time of release in 2016.
> Accounting for cumulative inflation of 6.8% that would be $3,738.89 today*.
> 
> But inflation can't be the only indicator, because the 5D mkIII was also $3499 at release in 2012. That would give it a value of $3,908.46 in 2020*.
> ...



If you go back and look at the USD ←→ yen exchange rates in 2008, 2012, 2016, etc. before comparing those prices in their historical context with the equivalent dollar amounts today you get a fuller picture.

Yes, I know that Canon does not pay their U.S. employees, both in retail sales channels and in support operations, in yen. They probably do not pay shipping costs to transport their products to the U.S. in yen.

But they *do* pay almost all of their R&D and manufacturing expenses in yen, so exchange rates do matter.


----------



## Ozarker (May 29, 2020)

tomtomtom said:


> Wow dude! D'you actually work for Canon? I'm trying to point out that the market changed dramatically, in order to sell the price has to be right. I'm not talking just about Canon. My kit ain't cheap bruv, I'm just not 100% convinced it's worth all that money. I know a lot of people who think the same way. DSLRs age very quickly, too quickly. It's not about how much you spend but what you get. Camera manufacturers want you to spend 4k+ for a semi-pro body every 4 years; roughly. And now change a system as well. Given the economy, the technology and, most of all, the way people consume photography 4k price tag dramatically limits your sales volume. Higher price will not make up for it. It's simple. If this continues the camera as we know it, DSLR, will extinct because of greed of the likes of Canon.
> 
> It should actually be well below 3k. Well below. Producing D7, D7.5, D6.25 etc will not help either.


In my opinion, what a camera company wants and what an individual can or should do is two different things. Canon might want one to switch every 4 years or so, but that doesn't mean one should or even that it is necessary. I mostly shoot portraits. I had everything I needed and wanted with the 5D mark III and and big collection of EF "L" lenses. Everything I had did everything I needed to do. If I were a professional portrait shooter, I really don't see why I could not have gone on for several more years with what I had. Most people (probably 99.999%) have no idea what we are shooting with or what the cost is anyway. All they care about is the result. To be real honest, if results sucked with a 5D mark III they will suck with an R5 and RF glass too. Professional photographers are not nearly as large a market, and not as important, as people who just do this stuff for fun and have the money to do it with. Many of us (like me) have very little money and just want what we want... so we get it when we can, however we can. I'd love to have a side by side retail priced $14,000 4x4 ATV, but I can't afford one. In my disappointment, should I accuse the manufacturer of being greedy and decide myself that the price shout be $6k? Seriously, that is a flawed world view. It really isn't about what you spend or what you get with any of these modern cameras. It is about what you can do with what you get. Is any camera worth the money? For me, and many thousands of others, it isn't about money at all. I don't make a cent. However, the pleasure of the hobby makes it totally worth it.


----------



## HarryFilm (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> One will have to shoot the video with the intention of only using it for frame grabs if they wish to use a "sports rated" exposure time. At 1/1000 second video will look very choppy. If they use "video rated" exposure times/180° shutter angle, then frame grabs will suffer immensely from subject motion blur.



For video, you SHOULD BE shooting at a 1/xyz shutter speed where xyz is equal to twice the frame rate. So if you're shooting 24 fps in video you should be at 1/48th of second shutter speed. For 30 fps video it should be 1/60th of a second and 60 fps should be 1/120th of a second, etc. That means you will STILL get video-centric motion blur which will look quite nice on most modern televisions.

If you are doing frame grabs (i.e. DCI 8K 8192 by 4320 pixel or 35 megapixels) from the R5, it depends upon the subject matter. For sports, I am shooting 1/400th at a minimum for basketball/hockey/football/soccer up to 1/2000th of a second for F1, Skiing, Air Races, Speed boats, etc. You can use software to get rid of rolling shutter at a loss of about 100 to 200 pixels on either the left or right side where the temporal interpolator (i.e. camera-pan-oriented, time-based photo pixel re-interpolator) will move pixels left or right to remove rolling shutter effects.

From what I have heard, rolling shutter on the R5 will be NOWHERE NEAR AS BAD as what some of the Sony cameras are like!

Canon makes their own sensors so they DO NOT DEPEND upon what Sony does with CMOS image sensors! Canon ALSO HAS the ability to make a Global Shutter Sensor as that is what's in the current Canon C700 4K GS Cinema Camera which is GLORIOUS to behold! I've used that one quite a bit now and I REALLY LIKE global shutter CMOS cameras!

I suspect the upcoming Canon R1 Pro-level Mirrorless WILL HAVE a likely 6K Global Shutter Sensor (25.16 megapixels) at 30 fps burst rate for stills! And that means with a Global Shutter 6K sensor at 3:2 aspect ratio 6144 by 4096 pixels (aka 25.16 megapixels), the dynamic range will be MORE THAN 15 STOPS probably and is even likely to be 16 stops with GREAT nearly-noiseless imagery at ISO 12,800 in low-light and highly usable imagery using ISO 25,600 in low light situations!

The Canon R1 Pro-level Mirrorless will take video at 6144 pixels by 3456 pixels (16:9) at a probably full 60 fps in BOTH 4:4:4 3:1 RAW and H.265 video at 10-bit 4:2:2 colour with DPAF and fully active high quality eye/face tracking! All Canon needs to DO THEN is make sure that they add a 4 or 8 terabyte removable SSD drive slot in addition to the DUAL CF-express so that your MANY HOURS of video and HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of HEIF-format still photos can be done on a single drive or via two fast cards OR split between them for 4K proxy video and HEIF stills on the CF-express cards and 6K full 3:1 RAW video and full 3:1 RAW stills on the removable SSD drive!

I should finally note that 25.16 megapixels is the PERFECT BALANCE between a Full Frame sensor with enough low-noise and high-enough sensitivity and dynamic range for bad lighting concerts and night street photography versus a high-enough pixel count for pro-level sports/action/wildlife commercial photography! IF THAT is what the Canon R1 Pro-Level Mirrorless brings at $6399 US, then Nikon become TOTALLY DEAD IN THE WATER !!!! The D6/D7 WILL BE GONE !!! No-one would buy it ESPECIALLY if the Canon R1 has a native R-mount f/4 to f/5.6 150mm to 650 L-series Sports Zoom available!

That combo of a FAST-glass 150 to 650mm sports zoom with 6K 60 fps 10-bit 4:2:2 video/25.16 megapixel 4:4:4 RAW stills at 30 fps burst rate all for $6499 US IS A TOTAL NIKON DESTROYER !!!

Whooooooaaaaaaaa !!!! Most Excellent !!!!!

V


----------



## Quackator (May 29, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Let's hope that 6 week sea freight shipments will not delay the R5 deliveries then (...)



It won't. Canon usually sets a sales embargo, and they make 
sure every reputable dealer in every country has stock before 
they allow anyone to sell.

Sell early only once, and all your future orders will show as 
being backordered for the next century. So nobody does it.

On sales day, everywhere around the world there will be stock.
When Canon showed first teaser images, the hardware was 
already finalized and production had started full throttle. 

There was work to be done on software (firmware/DPP), manual,
marketing material, but the hardware was there.

This time they will not caught with their pants down by excessive
demand as had happened with the 5D MkII. They know what to 
expect. And they know that all the first day buyers are willing to pay 
almost any price, so they make sure to have enough stock all over 
the world to make as many people as possible a first day buyer.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 29, 2020)

Quackator said:


> Actually I had hoped the R would be what now the R5 turns out to be.
> Test drove the R for a week, and while the technical results were impeccable,
> I found the ergonomics repulsive.
> 
> ...


It's so interesting how people can have the same thing yet have totally different experiences. I moved from a 7D MKII to the R and after a week or so, even though the buttons and screen etc were different found I was completely comfortable with the ergonomics.

I don't think there is a right & wrong in this kind of thing, sometimes there's no logical reason why as it's a perfectly good piece of equipment but you just dont feel comfortable with something. I've had that with other things.

it sounds like you have a wider experience with different bodies than me so know what you like and are comfortable with. I say go for it if it works for you.


----------



## koenkooi (May 29, 2020)

Quackator said:


> It won't. Canon usually sets a sales embargo, and they make
> sure every reputable dealer in every country has stock before
> they allow anyone to sell.
> 
> ...



Sometimes stores will start shipping preorders a day early to make it show up on your doorstep on launch day. I always wonder if that violates the embargo or not.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 29, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I was also considering whether to get the RF24-105mm or not (and sell my EF24-105mm L mark 1) but I realised that I do have different use cases. 24-105mm for walk around and for indoor sports where there is a lot of movement at variable distance (eg karate sparing where everyone is on the floor at the same time) with the ISO cranked up. If I have space, then I will take the 70-200mm f/2.8 and the 16-35mm f/4 for coverage in any situation... groups with the wide angle eg churches where you might not have a lot of distance with lots of people and telephoto for closeups of couples/babies etc. I can't justify the RF15-35mm as I will always need some depth of field for groups and the quality of the EF16-35 f/4 is excellent. My land/seascapes with higher apertures don't need f/2.8 and my 77mm filter set fits both telephoto and wide angle. Lots of extra cost to move the the RF wide angle for me. I will probably get the (probable) RF24-105mm kit with the R5 and sell my EF24-105mm.


I do like the RF 24-105MM F4L it's a genuine all rounder and after having the EF version, it is an improvement. I was seriously thinking about switching to the RF24-70mm f2.8l but I just dont think I will have the scenarios where it will benefit me so cant justify the cost. 

I think it's a case of seeing the shiny new kit and wanting it but I think sense and my bank balance will prevail, especially if I buy the R5.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Looking at your kit, I have a similar set up, EOS R, 24-105MM f4 & 70-200MM F2.8 &I've been thinking about swapping the 24-105 for the 28-70mm for the extra aperture. Do you find you have to swap lenses often as there is no overlap?



I've had both the EF24-105mm f/4 L IS and the original EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L in my kit for a decade. They're different lenses for different use cases. 

The biggest strength of the original 24-105/4 is that it can take a pounding like no other lens I've ever seen and just keeps on working. It's not the greatest in an optical sense, but very often it is good enough. The IS also comes in handy when I'm shooting a concert from the wings on an outdoor temporary stage that is bouncing around like the San Andreas Fault just before Game 3 of the 1989 World Series.

The extra focal length range is nice for a lot of two body situations since I tend to shoot a 70-200/2.8 on an APS-C body if there's enough light to hold 1/1000 at ISO 3200 doing sports under the lights, so the 24-105 ends right were the 70-200 * 1.6 = 112-320 "equivalent" angle of view begins. In that scenario, the wider angles of view from the 24-105/4 let me get away with slower Tv than I can with the telephoto. 

If I'm in dimmer light and need the 24-70/2.8 for the extra stop of speed, I'm probably shooting the 70-200 on another FF body if I'm not shooting fast primes on both FF bodies.

Where the 24-70/2.8 shines for me is when I still need a zoom for tripod mounted work in low light. This places a higher premium on optics than build and IS. That, and when I need the better IQ than the 24-105 can give even if shooting handheld.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I think the UK is on a bunch of islands off the continent, so it depends upon what you mean by "Europe." They used to have holdings on the mainland, but that was a lot wars ago.



The islands occupied by Great Britain are on the continental shelf of the European continent.


----------



## edoorn (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Again, those who actually use the EOS 1D X Mark III to shoot birds and other animals say it locks onto the eyes of birds and animals very consistently in LV. Who cares what the marketing department calls it?



can you imagine what the R5 is capable of 

I would think a firmware could come to the 1DX III, enabling 'true' animal AF like the way eye AF works. The 1DX III is of course a terrific body, but I think in terms of AF, an R1-type body would run circles around it when it appears next year.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

schokuspokus said:


> What is the best alternative to the Canon R5/R6. Something less pricey but good enough for portrait photography.
> Would love to get the R5 but a prize of guessed 4299€ but the insane cost of the R glass makes photography extremely less fun for me.
> Love to have the best but this is in sum too much - as a hobby.
> Full frame in a small studio would be preferred but any input is welcome.



Right now it's hard to beat the 6D Mark II for the price. Put an EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS on it and you're in business in your small portrait studio for less than the cost of an R5 body and no lens.

Of course it's not a sexy new mirrorless and all...


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Personally I am not a fan of the 5Ds and consider it a niche camera similar to the 1DX. He/She will end up with massive files that are huge overkill for a hobbyist in a studio and a camera body that is not great at much else. The 5DIV is a true hybrid camera and is more suitable to a wider range of scenarios.



But were can you get a grey market 5D IV for $1,100? At that point just buy a US warranteed 6D II.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Jayk0607 said:


> I made a quick chart showing the price with inflation (using https://www.usinflationcalculator.com). Yellow highlighted cell is the launch price and shows what the price is with inflation adjustments by the year of other releases.
> 
> View attachment 190628
> 
> ...



The EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II was $2,499 USD at launch in March of 2010 but dropped to $2,299 by late summer. It went back up to $2,499 for most of 2011 and again from mid-2013 to mid-2014. It didn't drop to $2,099 (without a temporary promotional incentive) until about five years after introduction in mid-2015.

If you got your prices from the Wikipedia article, the prices of the discontinued lenses all appear to be their official MSRP (before promotional discounts) when they were replaced, not when they were introduced. The prices for the lenses still in the catalog also appear to be their current MSRP (before promotional "instant rebates") and not their introductory prices.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> That is an interesting question, but I think the more relevant question is what is best telezoom to pick amongst the currently available RF 70-200 f/2.8 versus the upcoming RF 70-135 /f2 and the RF 100-500. The answer is going to depend on what other lenses you have in your kit and how you use your lenses. Between the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II and the 100-400 II, I used the 100-400 II more because my kids play soccer and for travel. The 70-200 was primarily a portrait and indoor lens. However, I got the 70-200 first and I used it for everything (even with the extenders). It's only when there multiple options to choose from that the 70-200 got less use.
> 
> I see a similar scenario playing out for the RF ecosystem. The RF 70-200 may be the best single lens choice, and it's reduction in stored length and weight makes it more portable than its EF counterpart (but it doesn't accept TCs anymore). However, if you plan on getting the 100-500 anyway, then the 70-200 becomes less important. Like the RF 28-70, I see the RF 70-135 as more of a niche lens. I'd expect it to be similar to the 70-200 in weight/size, so you're trading focal length range for a larger max aperture. The scenario that I'd make that trade most is for portraits and indoor stuff. Where the 70-135 f/2 gets interesting is that it's getting to max apertures of primes. The current L 135mm prime is f/2, and the RF 70-135 will get you there, so I can see Canon selling more RF 70-135s because people may use it like the 135 f/2L only with the flexibility of zooming. It'll be interesting to see if Canon releases a RF prime at 135mm. If so, I'd expect the max aperture to be faster the f/2, but what is the trade between aperture and cost? Sigma is at f/1.8 and that's only 1/3 of a stop, so I can't see that as being a big differentiator between a prime and a zoom. If Canon tries to go to f/1.4, then it'll cost a lot more (similar front element size to the EF 200 f/2 and EF 300 f/2.8).
> 
> In your case, if you're restricted by budget to a 2 zoom L lens solution, then it'll be based on the max focal length you need and get less expensive EF f/1.8 prime to adapt for portraits/indoors.



Your kids' soccer games must have been in daylight!


----------



## SecureGSM (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> One will have to shoot the video with the intention of only using it for frame grabs if they wish to use a "sports rated" exposure time. At 1/1000 second video will look very choppy. If they use "video rated" exposure times/180° shutter angle, then frame grabs will suffer immensely from subject motion blur.


Exactly my point, Michael. And rolling shutter issues in addition to the motion blur issue.


----------



## scyrene (May 29, 2020)

tomtomtom said:


> DSLRs age very quickly, too quickly.



They do?


----------



## koenkooi (May 29, 2020)

scyrene said:


> They do?



I would say anything digital ages too quickly, but I don't think that's what the original poster was implying.


----------



## Joules (May 29, 2020)

This thread could well be renamed 'CR Off topic talk'  22 Pages of comments on a post that essentially reads 'The pricing won't be ridiculous' is kinda funny.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> RP is a nice body and cheap too but what about the R, slightly higher MP count, better battery life?



If you're also considering adding other bodies that use the more ubiquitous LP-E6/LP-E6N/LP-E6x (whatever they're gong to call the R5 version) battery then that's another plus for the R instead of the RP.


----------



## jedy (May 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> In my opinion, what a camera company wants and what an individual can or should do is two different things. Canon might want one to switch every 4 years or so, but that doesn't mean one should or even that it is necessary. I mostly shoot portraits. I had everything I needed and wanted with the 5D mark III and and big collection of EF "L" lenses. Everything I had did everything I needed to do. If I were a professional portrait shooter, I really don't see why I could not have gone on for several more years with what I had. Most people (probably 99.999%) have no idea what we are shooting with or what the cost is anyway. All they care about is the result. To be real honest, if results sucked with a 5D mark III they will suck with an R5 and RF glass too. Professional photographers are not nearly as large a market, and not as important, as people who just do this stuff for fun and have the money to do it with. Many of us (like me) have very little money and just want what we want... so we get it when we can, however we can. I'd love to have a side by side retail priced $14,000 4x4 ATV, but I can't afford one. In my disappointment, should I accuse the manufacturer of being greedy and decide myself that the price shout be $6k? Seriously, that is a flawed world view. It really isn't about what you spend or what you get with any of these modern cameras. It is about what you can do with what you get. Is any camera worth the money? For me, and many thousands of others, it isn't about money at all. I don't make a cent. However, the pleasure of the hobby makes it totally worth it.


Very well put. Over the years I’ve worked with a few small video production companies and the most important aspects to them was delivering on time to the client, keeping the budget to a reasonable level and using equipment that won’t unnecessarily increase the workload. One company (made up of two people and me), back in the day used 5DII’s and 5DIII’s to shoot video, even though Blackmagic offered superior video quality. For them the workflow using Canon DSLR’s was much quicker, no need to deal with large 4K files or advanced colour grading plus the investment in Blackmagic, including the higher cost in SSD’s and batteries, far outweighed any gains in video quality. For the types of video work they were doing, 1080p was good enough (the clients would never have noticed anyway). Of course they now use Blackmagic cameras but have always worked within their means.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Not to quibble a lot but
> "Since Incoterms 1980 introduced the Incoterm FCA, FOB should only be used for non-containerized seafreight and inla"nd waterway transport. However, FOB is commonly used incorrectly for all modes of transport despite the contractual risks that this can introduce. In some common law countries such as the United States of America, FOB is not only connected with the carriage of goods by sea but also used for inland carriage aboard any "vessel, car or other vehicle.""
> Since we are referring to international countries/shipments then FCA or more recently DAP is more commonly used for airfreight.
> 
> ...



My understanding from a conversation I had over a decade ago was that, at least at that time, Canon did ship some initial new product loads to their regional distribution centers via seagoing containers but that some replenishment shipments were typically smaller and more time sensitive so moved via air freight.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Let's hope that 6 week sea freight shipments will not delay the R5 deliveries then or perhaps mishaps like these 40 containers lost off the coast of Sydney. Rather than cameras on the beaches, they were PPE :-(
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05...-washes-ashore-from-apl-england-ship/12291416



Transit time for Tokyo or Yokohama to Long Beach was typically 11 days before the Covid shutdown. Allow a bit less than a week on each end for getting them processed in/out of the port facility and on/off the ship. Then it's all up to how long it takes to clear customs.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Despite the constant message that the 5Div was a minor improvement, I was pleasantly surprised how much of a difference it made as an overall package... and for a relatively small changeover cost from a 5Diii to a second hand 5Div.



At base ISO it was a significant improvement in DR. Not so much above ISO 800 or so, but then Canon was already as good as anyone else above ISO 800.


----------



## BillB (May 29, 2020)

tomtomtom said:


> Wow dude! D'you actually work for Canon? I'm trying to point out that the market changed dramatically, in order to sell the price has to be right. I'm not talking just about Canon. My kit ain't cheap bruv, I'm just not 100% convinced it's worth all that money. I know a lot of people who think the same way. DSLRs age very quickly, too quickly. It's not about how much you spend but what you get. Camera manufacturers want you to spend 4k+ for a semi-pro body every 4 years; roughly. And now change a system as well. Given the economy, the technology and, most of all, the way people consume photography 4k price tag dramatically limits your sales volume. Higher price will not make up for it. It's simple. If this continues the camera as we know it, DSLR, will extinct because of greed of the likes of Canon.
> 
> It should actually be well below 3k. Well below. Producing D7, D7.5, D6.25 etc will not help either.


Well, the 5DIV is now $2500, so there is a lower price option for those who want a FF DSLR. Then there is the 6DII.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

edoorn said:


> can you imagine what the R5 is capable of
> 
> I would think a firmware could come to the 1DX III, enabling 'true' animal AF like the way eye AF works. The 1DX III is of course a terrific body, but I think in terms of AF, an R1-type body would run circles around it when it appears next year.



If it locks on an animals eye and tracks it as well as any camera in existence, why isn't it already "true" animal AF? Why does it need a firmware update if it is already doing the job as well as any camera on the planet?

You're just getting caught up on what's printed on a spec sheet put out by the marketing department instead of looking at how the system actually performs. In Live View the EOS 1D X Mark III has AF that locks on and tracks animals' eyes that is as good as anything else currently on the market.

Like I said way up yonder, historically the 5D series has been a half a notch behind the 1-series when it comes to AF performance and consistency from frame to frame, even when they both have the same PDAF hardware. So we know this is a conscious decision by Canon to give the "top" model better performance. Expect what you want. I'll be surprised if the R5 tracks animal eyes better than the 1D X Mark III in LV.


----------



## Otara (May 29, 2020)

In speed no, but ergonomically using the VF and tracking animal eyes will probably be a lot easier than using the screen, which isnt possible with the 1DX.

Waiting until its actually out will certainly be worthwhile though, all too theoretical for now.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If you're also considering adding other bodies that use the more ubiquitous LP-E6/LP-E6N/LP-E6x (whatever they're gong to call the R5 version) battery then that's another plus for the R instead of the RP.


hadn't thought of that but very true indeed.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If it locks on an animals eye and tracks it as well as any camera in existence, why isn't it already "true" animal AF? Why does it need a firmware update if it is already doing the job as well as any camera on the planet?
> 
> You're just getting caught up on what's printed on a spec sheet put out by the marketing department instead of looking at how the system actually performs. In Live View the EOS 1D X Mark III has AF that locks on and tracks animals' eyes that is as good as anything else currently on the market.
> 
> Like I said way up yonder, historically the 5D series has been a half a notch behind the 1-series when it comes to AF performance and consistency from frame to frame, even when they both have the same PDAF hardware. So we know this is a conscious decision by Canon to give the "top" model better performance. Expect what you want. I'll be surprised if the R5 tracks animal eyes better than the 1D X Mark III in LV.


I think the acid test for the R5 will be how the 12/20 FPS flows through to the EVF as no matter how good the animal AF is, if the EVF has a lag like the R does when in high speed servo mode, it will almost render it useless for that type of photography.

I'm hoping Canon have sorted that and either removed the lag or at least reduced it to an acceptable level with some sort of technical wizardry which is beyond me lol.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Otara said:


> In speed no, but ergonomically using the VF and tracking animal eyes will probably be a lot easier than using the screen, which isnt possible with the 1DX.
> 
> Waiting until its actually out will certainly be worthwhile though, all too theoretical for now.



Some users are putting loupes on the back of their 1D X Mark III so they can use it more like a viewfinder.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=19034457&i=i114345881


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> I think the acid test for the R5 will be how the 12/20 FPS flows through to the EVF as no matter how good the animal AF is, if the EVF has a lag like the R does when in high speed servo mode, it will almost render it useless for that type of photography.
> 
> I'm hoping Canon have sorted that and either removed the lag or at least reduced it to an acceptable level with some sort of technical wizardry which is beyond me lol.





Michael Clark said:


> Some users are putting loupes on the back of their 1D X Mark III so they can use it more like a viewfinder.
> 
> https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=19034457&i=i114345881



Again, what technology is required to offer a low latency EVF that isn't also needed to offer a low latency LCD screen?

With the 1D X Mark III in Live View Canon has already proven they *can* do it. The only question remaining is if they *will* do it with the EOS R5.


----------



## edoorn (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If it locks on an animals eye and tracks it as well as any camera in existence, why isn't it already "true" animal AF? Why does it need a firmware update if it is already doing the job as well as any camera on the planet?
> 
> You're just getting caught up on what's printed on a spec sheet put out by the marketing department instead of looking at how the system actually performs. In Live View the EOS 1D X Mark III has AF that locks on and tracks animals' eyes that is as good as anything else currently on the market.
> 
> Like I said way up yonder, historically the 5D series has been a half a notch behind the 1-series when it comes to AF performance and consistency from frame to frame, even when they both have the same PDAF hardware. So we know this is a conscious decision by Canon to give the "top" model better performance. Expect what you want. I'll be surprised if the R5 tracks animal eyes better than the 1D X Mark III in LV.



Well, we'll see. It's obvious the R5 will have the raw processing power to handle complex AF situations, considering the fact it can handle 8K raw video. I think ultimately the 1Dx III will still be the tool for many working pro's in sports and news. For now. Also because the big agencies have tons and tons of EF glass. I also expect it to be the last OVF based 1DX. For me personally, the R5 seems like a match made in heaven; never expected Canon to do something like this.

I shoot commercial work and portraits, but also events and weddings. And wildlife. It's a one can do all. Apart from that I've also begun working on my video skills to add as service to clients, and that is something this camera can do pretty good too. Not of course as good as a C line camera, but good enough. My faith is large enough I've asked a retailer here to place a pre-pre-order and a custom quote for a couple of bodies and a bag of RF lenses


----------



## Michael Clark (May 29, 2020)

HarryFilm said:


> For video, you SHOULD BE shooting at a 1/xyz shutter speed where xyz is equal to twice the frame rate. So if you're shooting 24 fps in video you should be at 1/48th of second shutter speed. For 30 fps video it should be 1/60th of a second and 60 fps should be 1/120th of a second, etc. That means you will STILL get video-centric motion blur which will look quite nice on most modern televisions.



Yeah, that's what 180° shutter angle means.


----------



## BillB (May 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> I think the acid test for the R5 will be how the 12/20 FPS flows through to the EVF as no matter how good the animal AF is, if the EVF has a lag like the R does when in high speed servo mode, it will almost render it useless for that type of photography.
> 
> I'm hoping Canon have sorted that and either removed the lag or at least reduced it to an acceptable level with some sort of technical wizardry which is beyond me lol.


I think that we will not see an R1 until Canon has EVF and mirrorless AF technology where they want it, and I am not sure that will happen by next year. The R5 performance will be a benchmark for where they are now.


----------



## 12Broncos (May 29, 2020)

I gave some feedback to Canon on their 'Feedback page.' I told them I was quite frustrated on the fact that an announcement can't be made on the R5. A release date I can wait patiently on. I told them, 'I know they probably don't care that I'm frustrated.' Puny customer, against a giant company. What can I do? I could go to Nikon, but Nikon is pulling the same stunt Canon is. I got a response a few days later, and they sent me a link to what isn't a brochure on the R5, maybe it is idk.. I thought, 'Ok, this is close to what I wanted.' 
Here is the link to what they gave me. Hope you enjoy, have an awesome day!

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/...e/product-showcases/cameras-and-lenses/eos-r5


----------



## cayenne (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> So you are either in one of the five states, covering only 2.5% of the U.S. population between all of them, that have no retail sales tax or you're in one of the remaining six states that have not yet passed legislation requiring out of state retailers to collect some form of sales tax on items shipped to consumers in their state. In either case, you're in the shrinking minority among U.S. citizens.



Sounds like you're angry or something....?

I mean, why not just be happy for those that for the time being still can get a good deal?


----------



## RunAndGun (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If B&H is absorbing the cost of paying sales tax to states without listing it on the invoice, it's affecting their net revenue generated by the transaction and has to be made up somewhere. They're probably hoping I won't pay the balance off in time and they get to charge me high interest on the unpaid balance. In the end, it seems what they are effectively doing is getting away with charging less than the Canon allowed minimum advertised price!
> 
> If Canon sets the minimum advertised price at $1,999 for an item and B&H sells it to me for $1,999 +$159.92 sales tax = $2,158.92 and then rebates me $159.92 on the credit card statement I've sent them $1,999. They'll keep $1,839.08 and send my state $159.92 on their monthly or quarterly sales tax report.



It’s been covered fairly in-depth since it’s introduction, but the basics are it’s essentially a store credit card for B&H issued by Synchrony Bank and it works like “cash back”/rewards credit cards, but it’s automatic, so when you pay the statement it’s already been applied and it’s outside of the actual store purchase transaction, so it doesn’t run afoul of any manufacturers stipulations on discounting/rebating certain items. The card has a ridiculous APR and they’re of course banking(ha ha) on people not paying it off every month. But, if you pay your card off every month and your state charges sales tax, it’s kind of crazy not to use it. Your state gets its sales tax, you are in compliance with paying sales tax and you pay a net amount for the item equal to not having sales tax charged. Win-win-win.


----------



## [email protected] (May 29, 2020)

Quackator, I find that running around with the wide and close extremes leaves me with a night's work that is a whole lot more interesting than when I run around with an overlapping set of zooms in the middle. I've never really identified exactly why this is. Perhaps it's the greater variety of compositions, and the on-the-go creativity inspired as needed to make it work. This is true even if the key shots wind up being ones closer to the middle of the zoom ranges. 



Quackator said:


> Ask 5 photographers, get 7 opinions.
> 
> Shooting live shows and corporate events, I found that the
> RF 2.8/15-35mm and the Sigma 1.8/135mm ART, each on
> a separate body did everything I needed.


----------



## usern4cr (May 29, 2020)

Quackator said:


> Ask 5 photographers, get 7 opinions.
> 
> Shooting live shows and corporate events, I found that the
> RF 2.8/15-35mm and the Sigma 1.8/135mm ART, each on
> ...


How about the RF 15-35 f2.8 on one body and the RF 70-135 f2 on the other?  It seems that if you like the 135 f1.8 then you'd love the 70-135 f2 even more.

I have similar interests, in that I'm buying all new Canon gear, so I'm thinking of 2 bodies and 3 lenses: RF 15-35 f2.8, RF 70-135 f2, and RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1.  I'd really miss the RF 70-200 f2.8 as it's so compact and outstanding, but I don't see a compelling need for it if I do get the 3 lenses I mentioned. What do you think?


----------



## tomtomtom (May 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> If anything, in my opinion, the pandemic has increased Canon's costs. Increased losses too. There are always those who scream "GREED!". I'll never understand it. Usually it is those complaining and being greedy... demanding a product for a price *they* have determined is fair without any knowledge of the company's costs. It makes me laugh every time.
> 
> I used to have a son-in-law that would brag about his pirated copies of movies and software he'd bought at a fraction of the retail price for genuine legitimate product. He was always saying that, "those greedy corporations have enough money and they should be giving it away." SMH The guy never could hold a job and was always looking for someone to sue. Glad he's out of the picture.



Perfect example, thank you. Don't know your son-in-law but a lot of people, who actually could and did hold their jobs felt the same way about movies and music. And yes, it was greed. I happen to know how much the film industry had to change its modus operandi. The production costs, distribution etc. in order to deliver a product at a price people would actually pay.

Now the same is happening to camera manufacturers. I don't really care what it costs to develop and produce a camera, and frankly neither should you, as a costumer. Company the size of Canon has ways to diversify its cost, to optimise them. We consumers don't know what the cost is, and it's not our problem. One thing for certain: high price kills sales volume, in the end it can kill the product - semi-pro HQ DSLR HYBRID with or without a mirror - as well.

I'm a documentary photographer, for me camera is a tool, for some it is still a way to show off. Although, a camera is hardly a fashionable gadget any more. Many hobby photographers are more and more happy to play with their phones. For them good phone does the job and is a cool gadget at the same time. And tbh phones often do a fantastic job! The market is shrinking, the way people consume photography has changed. Make semi-pro DSLR too expensive you will kill it. Even bellow 3k is still a lot for a lifestyle that's pretty much gone. The likes of Canon should come to terms with this.

No matter what sort of marketing magic you're going to perform (product diversification, changing lens systems etc.) you will lose.


----------



## Kit. (May 29, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> It’s been covered fairly in-depth since it’s introduction, but the basics are it’s essentially a store credit card for B&H issued by Synchrony Bank and it works like “cash back”/rewards credit cards, but it’s automatic, so when you pay the statement it’s already been applied and it’s outside of the actual store purchase transaction, so it doesn’t run afoul of any manufacturers stipulations on discounting/rebating certain items. The card has a ridiculous APR and they’re of course banking(ha ha) on people not paying it off every month. But, if you pay your card off every month and your state charges sales tax, it’s kind of crazy not to use it. Your state gets its sales tax, you are in compliance with paying sales tax and you pay a net amount for the item equal to not having sales tax charged. Win-win-win.


I wonder if such cashback counts as taxable income.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 29, 2020)

Kit. said:


> I wonder if such cashback counts as taxable income.


In general no, cash back (if it fits the IRS definition) is considered a discount not income, discounts are not taxable Income.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I used to have a son-in-law that would brag about his pirated copies of movies and software he'd bought at a fraction of the retail price for genuine legitimate product. He was always saying that, "those greedy corporations have enough money and they should be giving it away." SMH The guy never could hold a job and was always looking for someone to sue. Glad he's out of the picture.



So a counter point to the fake DVD thing, I used to domicile in the UK and work in SE Asia and the Caribbean and I travelled between the three regularly. Those three locations are in three different DVD regions and my very expensive laptop (at the time) had a DVD player, I was happy to buy genuine DVD’s but they were all region locked and because of the ‘digital rights’ of the corporations I couldn’t play my own genuine DVD’s on my own DVD player because the DVD player only allowed you to change the region it would work in 5 times during it’s life, a completely artificial limitation to the laptop specifically written into the code of the DVD player at the behest of the movie companies.

The corporate ’greed’ ended up giving me a choice, $5 for a fake but unlocked DVD or $20 for a genuine DVD I couldn’t watch...

Piracy is wrong, ill though out and badly implemented protectionist policies that were written by lawyers of big corporations and are heavily weighted to those corporations are also wrong.


----------



## carina_r31 (May 29, 2020)

There's a retailer in Berlin (Foto Meter) showing the EOS R5 body this weekend. Unfortunately, there won't be a possibility to test the camera. But I'm surprised they're showing the body, since the official announcement didn't take place so far. I don't think there'll be many new informations and they won't know a price for sure (or they won't tell), but I'll have a look at the event tomorrow  really excited nonetheless!


----------



## Ozarker (May 29, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> So a counter point to the fake DVD thing, I used to domicile in the UK and work in SE Asia and the Caribbean and I travelled between the three regularly. Those three locations are in three different DVD regions and my very expensive laptop (at the time) had a DVD player, I was happy to buy genuine DVD’s but they were all region locked and because of the ‘digital rights’ of the corporations I couldn’t play my own genuine DVD’s on my own DVD player because the DVD player only allowed you to change the region it would work in 5 times during it’s life, a completely artificial limitation to the laptop specifically written into the code of the DVD player at the behest of the movie companies.
> 
> The corporate ’greed’ ended up giving me a choice, $5 for a fake but unlocked DVD or $20 for a genuine DVD I couldn’t watch...
> 
> Piracy is wrong, ill though out and badly implemented protectionist policies that were written by lawyers of big corporations and are heavily weighted to those corporations are also wrong.


Most of us in the USA never leave our region.


----------



## yeahright (May 29, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I think the UK is on a bunch of islands off the continent, so it depends upon what you mean by "Europe." They used to have holdings on the mainland, but that was a lot wars ago.


This is what is generally considered to be part of Europe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe


----------



## Quackator (May 29, 2020)

usern4cr said:


> How about the RF 15-35 f2.8 on one body and the RF 70-135 f2 on the other?  It seems that if you like the 135 f1.8 then you'd love the 70-135 f2 even more.



That depends on what the 70-135 will deliver wide open at 135mm.
If it is anywhere near the Sigma Art, this is exactly what I will do.
But not without test driving both head to head before.


----------



## deleteme (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> On the other hand, "much of the world" was not included in a conversation about how much _*wait staff in the U.S.*_ are compensated.


The "view of the world " I am referencing begins outside your own home. In your own community.
Wait staff are frantically underpaid as a rule because of the assumption that tips cover the difference between the Federal minimum of $2.13/hr (applies in many states) and a "fair wage". 
Tips are profoundly unequally distributed despite the anecdotes people love to share of wait staff taking home thousands a week. Yes, some are very well paid. My cousin is a very pretty woman who was a grad student at Stanford and was able to make $4k a month waiting tables in San Francisco in the 70's is one of those. Today she is a professor at a University where she has students having to hold down two jobs earning tips that can barely afford low income housing.
The vast bulk of jobs that depend on tips are underpaid and not because of a lack of effort. 
This is but a small section in the much larger story of the structure of the US economy and culture that is designed to have a large, low paid and compliant workforce.


----------



## AEWest (May 29, 2020)

12Broncos said:


> I gave some feedback to Canon on their 'Feedback page.' I told them I was quite frustrated on the fact that an announcement can't be made on the R5. A release date I can wait patiently on. I told them, 'I know they probably don't care that I'm frustrated.' Puny customer, against a giant company. What can I do? I could go to Nikon, but Nikon is pulling the same stunt Canon is. I got a response a few days later, and they sent me a link to what isn't a brochure on the R5, maybe it is idk.. I thought, 'Ok, this is close to what I wanted.'
> Here is the link to what they gave me. Hope you enjoy, have an awesome day!
> 
> https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/...e/product-showcases/cameras-and-lenses/eos-r5


Thanks for the link. Although we know these specs, it does emphasize at the top of the specs an all new CMOS sensor and processor. Could it be a stacked sensor they have developed and used in the GX-7 Mark III? Here is a link to an article about this patented sensor from back in 2017. It may help explain how the camera can overcome overheating issues with high resolution video.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/canon-patent-details-stacked-sensors-with-autofocus-layer/


----------



## The Fat Fish (May 29, 2020)

I think this is more obvious that people give it credit for. The 8K video is the only stand out feature that other competitors don't currently offer. Whilst it's impressive, it's something many will not need or use so Canon would be silly to price the camera highly because of it, especially considering the lack of a 4K only version priced lower.

Based on what cameras like the A7RIV, Z7, S1R and others offer, I'd say around £3500-£3750 would be reasonable.


----------



## padam (May 29, 2020)

The Fat Fish said:


> I think this is more obvious that people give it credit for. The 8K video is the only stand out feature that other competitors don't currently offer. Whilst it's impressive, it's something many will not need or use so Canon would be silly to price the camera highly because of it, especially considering the lack of a 4K only version priced lower.
> 
> Based on what cameras like the A7RIV, Z7, S1R and others offer, I'd say around £3500-£3750 would be reasonable.


Only the S1R has 4k60p (this camera has 4k120p) and it has very weak continuous AF in a much bigger and heavier body, so it is more of a specialist camera, A7RIV is the same, having the higher resolution but slower, IBIS not as good, Z7 has no dual card slots, not as well integrated with older lenses, etc.
None of these cameras have 10-bit 4:2:2 internal recording with Log or an articulating screen, and they also don't share the same "middle-size" form factor.

The competitors do offer some of the features in some models, just not all of them in one package (one is better for stills, the other is better for video) and with the lens ecosystem behind it (Canon will have way more IS lenses to offer dual, or even triple IS with the electronic mode engaged). So yes, the EOS R5 looks to be sitting at the forefront for the time being, and it's not just because it can record 8K video.


----------



## Ozarker (May 29, 2020)

yeahright said:


> This is what is generally considered to be part of Europe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe


True, but that depends on whom you ask. I have a good friend from the U.K., a former London school teacher no less, who argues that the U.K. is not in Europe because it is made up of islands. Says he's not a European.

Then, in South America, it is not uncommon for students to be taught that there are but 5 continents: Eurasia, America, Africa, Australia, and Antarctica. (According to several people I have known from there.)

So "generally considered" can depend upon where one is from and who it is writing the books. That includes history. Just ask the Neo-Confederates here in the U.S.A.









How Many Continents Are There?


[/caption]Not everyone on this planet is in agreement as with regards to the total number of continents. So how many continents are there then, according to the disagreeing parties? Well, in Russia, Eastern Europe and Japan, the people there consider the continents of Europe and Asia as one...




www.universetoday.com


----------



## erader (May 29, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> Hmmm, it went from "Initial availability could come as early as July." to "announcement for the Canon EOS R5 coming in July"



life is tough right now


----------



## stevelee (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The islands occupied by Great Britain are on the continental shelf of the European continent.


I think the area of NC where I live is in exotic zone where you can’t tell what part is Africa and what is South America, or something like that. Africa is to our east, and mountains from the collision are west of us. I think some of our mountains wound up in Morocco.


----------



## Ozarker (May 29, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The islands occupied by Great Britain are on the continental shelf of the European continent.


Well, I guess if we are going to count shelfs... The United States and Russia share the Chukchi Shelf.  It is 98'-160' deep between the two countries. The Straight of Dover gets up to 225' deep. The *North American Plate *is a tectonic *plate *covering most of *North *America, Greenland, Cuba, the Bahamas, extreme northeastern Asia (in Siberian Russia), and parts of Iceland and the Azores.


----------



## Ozarker (May 30, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I think the area of NC where I live is in exotic zone where you can’t tell what part is Africa and what is South America, or something like that. Africa is to our east, and mountains from the collision are west of us. I think some of our mountains wound up in Morocco.


North Carolina is so beautiful.


----------



## Kit. (May 30, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> True, but that depends on whom you ask. I have a good friend from the U.K., a former London school teacher no less, who argues that the U.K. is not in Europe because it is made up of islands. Says he's not a European.


I wonder what people from Scotland and Northern Ireland think of it.


----------



## David_E (May 30, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If you're also considering adding other bodies that use the more ubiquitous LP-E6/LP-E6N/LP-E6x (whatever they're gong to call the R5 version) battery then that's another plus for the R instead of the RP.


One extra battery in my pocket for insurance (not often needed in my kind of work) and I do just fine with my RP. In _my_ _experience_, it outdoes the R in ergonomics and *it makes quality pics.*


----------



## [email protected] (May 30, 2020)

I think yours is a decent analysis. I owned the Panasonic S1R and currently have a couple Sony A7R4s, and both models are fantastic. But for the S1R's autofocus, I'd be all in with the Panasonic system running Sigma L glass. The thing the new Canon R5 has that'll move me from Sony (assuming equivalent AF capabilities) is the fast frames along with decent resolution. It's the thing that was missing. It's been a long, long time since Canon was competitive in the high-ish resolution/fast frames space. When the 5D4 first came out, it was a pretty decent combination, but wasn't on top, and was quickly left behind. 

Having done a camera system walk-about over the past two years, I can say that it'll be nice to come back to Canon menus. Sony people seriously underestimate what they're missing with that 1980's industrial machine LCD interface they grafted onto the camera. That said, Canon people may be surprised to discover that the Panasonic menu system is a bit better than theirs. In part, it has to do with monitor resolution. When you have amazing resolution, you can add another layer of tabs to make everything super easy. This is one of the reasons Sony menus aren't in a position to improve much right now, as all their cameras have lower-than-class-average resolution on the monitors. 



padam said:


> Only the S1R has 4k60p (this camera has 4k120p) and it has very weak continuous AF in a much bigger and heavier body, so it is more of a specialist camera, A7RIV is the same, having the higher resolution but slower, IBIS not as good, Z7 has no dual card slots, not as well integrated with older lenses, etc.
> None of these cameras have 10-bit 4:2:2 internal recording with Log or an articulating screen, and they also don't share the same "middle-size" form factor.
> 
> The competitors do offer some of the features in some models, just not all of them in one package (one is better for stills, the other is better for video) and with the lens ecosystem behind it (Canon will have way more IS lenses to offer dual, or even triple IS with the electronic mode engaged). So yes, the EOS R5 looks to be sitting at the forefront for the time being, and it's not just because it can record 8K video.


----------



## gmon750 (May 30, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Despite the constant message that the 5Div was a minor improvement, I was pleasantly surprised how much of a difference it made as an overall package... and for a relatively small changeover cost from a 5Diii to a second hand 5Div.



Absolutely agree with you. I've spent many nights going back and forth on buying a Mark IV. Knowing it would fit in my current (and very expensive) housing was a huge plus for me. Then I started hearing whispers about Canon's mirrorless offerings, then when the R-body came out, I was intrigued but disappointed, which made me "almost" decide to just buy the 5DM4... then I started hearing about Canon's R5 which had me thinking of buyer's remorse...

It's taking longer than I would have but if the R5 turns out to be the real deal in real-world reviews as it does on paper, then I'll be glad I waited. For what it's worth, it's not like I'm doing any underwater shoots for a while due to COVID so I can wait now.

It's pretty exciting stuff coming out of Canon!


----------



## Otara (May 30, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Some users are putting loupes on the back of their 1D X Mark III so they can use it more like a viewfinder.
> 
> https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=19034457&i=i114345881



Yes I used to do that with my 7D2. Was great until I wanted to use the OVF instead - I had a flip version which was a mixed experience, sometimes worked very well, other times Id get a dent in my head when I forgot it was there.


----------



## SteveC (May 30, 2020)

David_E said:


> One extra battery in my pocket for insurance (not often needed in my kind of work) and I do just fine with my RP. In _my_ _experience_, it outdoes the R in ergonomics and *it makes quality pics.*



The RP was my fallback plan in case I found the R5 to be too expensive. Not the R6, and not the R. Yeah, there's a lot missing from it but it has a respectable resolution and dirt cheap to make up for what's missing.

It would make a decent backup body, but I am thinking the M6 mkII or even my M50 are good cameras, so I don't really need a(nother) backup.


----------



## stevelee (May 30, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> North Carolina is so beautiful.


Especially in the spring and fall. Because of the collision of continents that caused our former east coast to become mountains and left bits and pieces of other continents, there are areas with more kinds of minerals and gemstones than most other places on earth. The big gold rush before 1849 was just east of here. There are former gold mines under downtown Charlotte. They still could be mined, but the gold available is worth less than the real estate above it.

About ten miles east of where I grew up was the largest lithium mine in the world for some years. There are places in the mountains with a large variety of gem stones.

If you dive to our continental shelf, you will find artifacts including arrowheads from the time when sea levels were much lower.


----------



## SteveC (May 30, 2020)

stevelee said:


> Especially in the spring and fall. Because of the collision of continents that caused our former east coast to become mountains and left bits and pieces of other continents, there are areas with more kinds of minerals and gemstones than most other places on earth. The big gold rush before 1849 was just east of here. There are former gold mines under downtown Charlotte. They still could be mined, but the gold available is worth less than the real estate above it.
> 
> About ten miles east of where I grew up was the largest lithium mine in the world for some years. There are places in the mountains with a large variety of gem stones.
> 
> If you dive to our continental shelf, you will find artifacts including arrowheads from the time when sea levels were much lower.



The mountains of Scotland, and Norway, are actually part of the same chain as the Appalachians. The rift that became the Atlantic ocean simply cut the range in two.


----------



## edoorn (May 30, 2020)

now I feel really bad because maybe in a few months I’ll have a terrific camera to capture the beauty of all these places mentioned here, but no wahy of getting there


----------



## Danglin52 (May 30, 2020)

tomtomtom said:


> Perfect example, thank you. Don't know your son-in-law but a lot of people, who actually could and did hold their jobs felt the same way about movies and music. And yes, it was greed. I happen to know how much the film industry had to change its modus operandi. The production costs, distribution etc. in order to deliver a product at a price people would actually pay.
> 
> Now the same is happening to camera manufacturers. I don't really care what it costs to develop and produce a camera, and frankly neither should you, as a costumer. Company the size of Canon has ways to diversify its cost, to optimise them. We consumers don't know what the cost is, and it's not our problem. One thing for certain: high price kills sales volume, in the end it can kill the product - semi-pro HQ DSLR HYBRID with or without a mirror - as well.
> 
> ...



I started to reply to your comments and decided it was a waste of time.


----------



## Ozarker (May 30, 2020)

stevelee said:


> Especially in the spring and fall. Because of the collision of continents that caused our former east coast to become mountains and left bits and pieces of other continents, there are areas with more kinds of minerals and gemstones than most other places on earth. The big gold rush before 1849 was just east of here. There are former gold mines under downtown Charlotte. They still could be mined, but the gold available is worth less than the real estate above it.
> 
> About ten miles east of where I grew up was the largest lithium mine in the world for some years. There are places in the mountains with a large variety of gem stones.
> 
> If you dive to our continental shelf, you will find artifacts including arrowheads from the time when sea levels were much lower.


I was stationed at MCAS Cherry Point years ago. I was also there in the mid 1960s when my Dad was stationed there. Beautiful state!


----------



## canonmike (May 30, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> No you don't, as I mentioned before it depends on the state you live in and how far along the state you live in is in mandating sales tax for online purchases. They did not charge me sales tax and I did not use their credit card and I built a C200 rig over the last two weeks using B&H.


Lucky you. I live in S.C. and B&H charges sales tax, whenever I order from them. Just moved here from Ga. Same there. B&H now charges sales tax in many states. You can see states affected by looking at B&H site list of states they are now required to charge tax for. I did apply for and used the referenced B&H Payboo card, which credits tax back immeditately but as one poster pointed out, you better make a pymt immediately to your Pay Boo acct to avoid high interest rate charges, something I'm sure Sychrony, the pay boo provider is depending on. Still, it gives a buyer an option to reduce purchase price by the sales tax amount. It works for me and I have used it several times since B&H started charging sales tax.


----------



## stevelee (May 30, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I was stationed at MCAS Cherry Point years ago. I was also there in the mid 1960s when my Dad was stationed there. Beautiful state!


My father was called back into the Marines during the Korean War and was at Camp Lejeune, not quite so far out as Cherry Point. He got home every other weekend, carpooling with guys who lived west of us. He never left NC, but trained troops to go to Korea. I was 4 years old. I have letters he sent to Mother discussing what for him to get me for my fifth birthday.


----------



## RunAndGun (May 30, 2020)

canonmike said:


> Lucky you. I live in S.C. and B&H charges sales tax, whenever I order from them. Just moved here from Ga. Same there. B&H now charges sales tax in many states. You can see states affected by looking at B&H site list of states they are now required to charge tax for. I did apply for and used the referenced B&H Payboo card, which credits tax back immeditately but as one poster pointed out, you better make a pymt immediately to your Pay Boo acct to avoid high interest rate charges, something I'm sure Sychrony, the pay boo provider is depending on. Still, it gives a buyer an option to reduce purchase price by the sales tax amount. It works for me and I have used it several times since B&H started charging sales tax.



Yes, you have to be careful. I really dislike the way they handle their billing. It’s emailed notices for on-line statements that are sent out roughly 20 days or so before the due date and then a notice a few days AFTER the due date (I missed mine after the second time I used it, because the due date is different/sooner than my other CC and most of my bill due dates). If they really cared about their customers paying it on-time, they would send out a second email notice right before it’s due(my airline CC sends out an email notice much closer to your due date to remind you). Luckily for me, it was a pretty decent purchase, so even with the late fee, I still came out cheaper vs. sales tax.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 30, 2020)

Kit. said:


> I wonder what people from Scotland and Northern Ireland think of it.



Scotland is part of the European content and we have a long history of close ties with other European countries. England is free to move their part of the island elsewhere.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 30, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Scotland is part of the European content and we have a long history of close ties with other European countries. England is free to move there part of the island elsewhere.


As is Scotland, indeed I’m sure many English people would relish the idea of no longer subsidizing Scotland and to no longer have Scottish representation in Parliament. Lets not forget Scottish people make laws applicable in England and their own different laws for Scotland, the English can’t do that.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 30, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> As is Scotland, indeed I’m sure many English people would relish the idea of no longer subsidizing Scotland and to no longer have Scottish representation in Parliament. Lets not forget Scottish people make laws applicable in England and their own different laws for Scotland, the English can’t do that.



We would be happy to no longer subsidise England, Its a big enough country that can surely stand on its own feet.


----------



## David_E (May 30, 2020)

SteveC said:


> _The RP was my fallback plan in case I found the R5 to be too expensive. Not the R6, and not the R. Yeah, there's a lot missing from it..._


“Missing” must be judged relative to one’s needs. For _my purposes_, the only thing missing from the Eos RP is GPS, and that’s easily enough fixed in the Lightroom Maps module. _For me_, the RP is a superb camera to take into the field and make research-grade macrophotos.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 30, 2020)

David_E said:


> “Missing” must be judged relative to one’s needs. For _my purposes_, the only thing missing from the Eos RP is GPS, and that’s easily enough fixed in the Lightroom Maps module. _For me_, the RP is a superb camera to take into the field and make research-grade macrophotos.



What about the greater than 1/4000 shutter speeds?. I often am shooting 1/6000 or 1/8000 and bumping up the aperture to reduce the light. Are you just using ND filters on the lenses during bright conditions?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 30, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> It's clear you have an opinion on Scottish independence, which is fine, but as an individual, you are not privy to the thoughts and opinions of the populations of Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland. That's what the referendum established, showing a majority of Scottish people wanted to stay part of the UK.
> 
> As this is a Canon forum and not a medium for campaigning for Scottish independence, it may be better to post your opinions elsewhere and when and if a further referendum is called, vote as you see fit.
> 
> ...



I was responding to previous poster that seems to have the idea that England is subsidising my country. You are right that this is indeed a Canon forum, and I could have chosen to ignore the previous poster but chose to remark that his view is seen equally on the other side.


----------



## tomtomtom (May 30, 2020)

*Aye2 *


Codebunny said:


> I was responding to previous poster that seems to have the idea that England is subsidising my country. You are right that this is indeed a Canon forum, and I could have chosen to ignore the previous poster but chose to remark that his view is seen equally on the other side.



*Aye2*


----------



## SecureGSM (May 30, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> What about the greater than 1/4000 shutter speeds?. I often am shooting 1/6000 or 1/8000 and bumping up the aperture to reduce the light. Are you just using ND filters on the lenses during bright conditions?


You should be good shooting in a bright day light conditions at ISO100, F2.8, T=1/3200s
At F1.4, T=1/12800s. Hence you would need a 2 stop ND filter even for a camera with 1/8000s max shutter speed.
A harsh daylight isn’t ideal from an artistic Perspective anyway.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 30, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> You should be good shooting in a bright day light conditions at ISO100, F2.8, T=1/3200s
> At F1.4, T=1/12800s. Hence you would need a 2 stop ND filter even for a camera with 1/8000s max shutter speed.



I am basing on f/1.8 where I have ran into issues. But even my f/2.8 300mm has hit 1/6000 at ISO 100. But regardless I was bringing it up as the only downside I see to the RP.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 30, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> We would be happy to no longer subsidise England, Its a big enough country that can surely stand on its own feet.











Scottish Income Tax shortfall offset by UK Funding


Scottish Government's £941 million income tax shortfall offset by £737 million increase in UK Government funding




www.gov.uk





Never let facts get in the way of a boorish opinion.



Starting out EOS R said:


> It's clear you have an opinion on Scottish independence, which is fine, but as an individual, you are not privy to the thoughts and opinions of the populations of Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland. That's what the referendum established, showing a majority of Scottish people wanted to stay part of the UK.
> 
> As this is a Canon forum and not a medium for campaigning for Scottish independence, it may be better to post your opinions elsewhere and when and if a further referendum is called, vote as you see fit.
> 
> ...


Being English I don’t have a vote on if the Scottish will continue to live outside their means and be subsidized by the English.

I have thousands and thousands of posts here many with illustrative images taken specifically for the thread, I touch on ‘politics’ considerably less than 1% of the time and won’t apologize for doing so. Invariably if you look past the instinctive reaction to any comment I make you will see that I am just stating facts, but if you don’t like that or me then either don’t read my comments or block me, that is what the feature is there for.

To be sure I am not a political person, indeed I have a pretty low opinion of all politicians irrespective of their tribe, but I hate unanswered misdirection and untruths more.


----------



## SecureGSM (May 30, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I am basing on f/1.8 where I have ran into issues. But even my f/2.8 300mm has hit 1/6000 at ISO 100. But regardless I was bringing it up as the only downside I see to the RP.


Yup, a x4 (2 stop) ND filter is alway on me. I generally like stopping down to F4-8, so my 2 stop ND filter gets a regular action outside in bright light on 5d4’s


----------



## slclick (May 30, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> What about the greater than 1/4000 shutter speeds?. I often am shooting 1/6000 or 1/8000 and bumping up the aperture to reduce the light. Are you just using ND filters on the lenses during bright conditions?


If a camera can't do 1/8000 I'm outta here.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 30, 2020)

slclick said:


> If a camera can't do 1/8000 I'm outta here.


I miss the 1/16,000 from my 1D


----------



## Danglin52 (May 30, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> http://[URL][URL]https://www.gov.uk...ish-income-tax-shortfall-offset-by-uk-funding[/URL][/URL]
> 
> Never let facts get in the way of a boorish opinion.
> 
> ...


----------



## privatebydesign (May 30, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> With respect, my reply was directly for Codebunny's comment, so not sure why you've taken exception to this??


I didn't take exception, I stated my opinion. I didn't take offense either because I very much respect the fact that you are entitled to your opinion, all is good.

I did assume you were including me because somebody else posted a similar comment about me the other day and Codebunny was replying to a comment of mine, I believe, which means I should carry the can for the direction it went.

But in general I agree, politics gets in the way of most things, mind you I believe we do a much better ob of keeping religion out of the threads so far...


----------



## herein2020 (May 30, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I am basing on f/1.8 where I have ran into issues. But even my f/2.8 300mm has hit 1/6000 at ISO 100. But regardless I was bringing it up as the only downside I see to the RP.



1/8000th? I have never in 10yrs of shooting shot a single image at 1/8000. For the work I do when I want to shoot wide open or nearly wide open (models, fashion, portraits, etc.) I use an ND filter to get me down to 1/200 because I am almost always using a remote trigger and some kind of flash lighting setup. Everything I do in camera 90% of the time is to get me to 1/200 (raise ISO, add ND, open aperture, etc). 

If I am shooting an outdoor event I'm typically shooting at 7.1 or higher to increase the focal plane and in those cases my shutter speed is hovering around 1/400 or 1/800. Even at 2.8 outdoors I don't think I've ever seen my shutter speed over 1/2000.

I'm curious what you are shooting where you have even hit 1/6000


----------



## TAF (May 30, 2020)

As an aside, consider the speed of the shutter curtain at 1/8000 of a second. The frame is 24mm high (call it 25mm for the edges), and the curtain transitions across is .000125 seconds. That translates into a velocity of 200,000 mm/sec = 200 m/sec = 447 mi/hr. At 1/16000, it would be supersonic. That's impressive engineering.

Impressive usually equals costly. So mirrorless should be less expensive. Perhaps the 5R will be less than the 5D4 at introduction?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 30, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> I'm curious what you are shooting where you have even hit 1/6000



A bird in a bright sky will put the shutter speed on a f/2.8 lens. Or take any f/1.2 - f/1.8 prime out in bright conditions. It of course pics up a lot on the shade and ideally we wont want to shoot right into bright sunlight. Millage may vary, I don't think I have many shots at 1/200.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 30, 2020)

TAF said:


> As an aside, consider the speed of the shutter curtain at 1/8000 of a second. The frame is 24mm high (call it 25mm for the edges), and the curtain transitions across is .000125 seconds. That translates into a velocity of 200,000 mm/sec = 200 m/sec = 447 mi/hr. At 1/16000, it would be supersonic. That's impressive engineering.
> 
> Impressive usually equals costly. So mirrorless should be less expensive. Perhaps the 5R will be less than the 5D4 at introduction?



I was curious about this and it seems some early DSLR's had this such as the Nikon D1 and original Canon 1D. I am prying a wee bit more to see why this feature didn't make it much further, perhaps it reduced shutter life span.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 30, 2020)

TAF said:


> As an aside, consider the speed of the shutter curtain at 1/8000 of a second. The frame is 24mm high (call it 25mm for the edges), and the curtain transitions across is .000125 seconds. That translates into a velocity of 200,000 mm/sec = 200 m/sec = 447 mi/hr. At 1/16000, it would be supersonic. That's impressive engineering.
> 
> Impressive usually equals costly. So mirrorless should be less expensive. Perhaps the 5R will be less than the 5D4 at introduction?





Codebunny said:


> I was curious about this and it seems some early DSLR's had this such as the Nikon D1 and original Canon 1D. I am prying a wee bit more to see why this feature didn't make it much further, perhaps it reduced shutter life span.


No the 1D and D1 were crop cameras so the frame wasn't 24mm high in the case of the 1D it was 19.1mm high.

Also the curtains don't have to travel that fast, or anywhere near it as the exposure is determined by the slit between the two curtains that travel at the same time, if you narrow the distance between the two curtains you shorten the exposure time even if the curtains travel at the same speed.

Oh and the 1D for sure used an electronic second curtain, or was it first curtain I forget, but either way it wasn't relying on the shutter curtain speed, don't forget the 1D was a CCD not a CMOS so fundamentally different and that is why it had a 1/500 sync speed too.


----------



## sanj (May 30, 2020)

Starting out [URL='http://i.viglink.com/?key=4d330a4797ea127575531d3ebd1213b0&insertId=96afae7cebfd5945&type=KW&exp=60%3ACI1C55A%3A2&libId=kau55fo50100y11i000DA8fsd02mx&loc=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.canonrumors.com%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fthreads%2Fcanon-eos-r5-launch-price-will-be-below-4000-usd-cr3.38606%2Fpage-25&v=1&iid=96afae7cebfd5945&out=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bhphotovideo.com%2Fc%2Fproduct%2F1433710-REG%2Fcanon_eos_r_mirrorless_digital.html&ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.canonrumors.com%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fthreads%2Fcanon-eos-r5-launch-price-will-be-below-4000-usd-cr3.38606%2F&title=(195)%20Canon%20EOS%20R5%20launch%20price%20will%20be%20below%20%244000%20USD%20%5BCR3%5D%20%7C%20Canon%20Rumors&txt=%3Cspan%3EEOS%20%3C%2Fspan%3E%3Cspan%3ER%3C%2Fspan%3E']EOS R[/URL] said:


> With respect, my reply was directly for Codebunny's comment, so not sure why you've taken exception to this??


This is a public forum.


----------



## herein2020 (May 30, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> A bird in a bright sky will put the shutter speed on a f/2.8 lens. Or take any f/1.2 - f/1.8 prime out in bright conditions. It of course pics up a lot on the shade and ideally we wont want to shoot right into bright sunlight. Millage may vary, I don't think I have many shots at 1/200.



Truly not trying to be funny (I know nothing about birding) but why would you shoot wide open in that scenario? I would drop down to 7.1 or higher since its a moving object, and there isn't really a background to blur (if you are shooting into a background that bright). Personally I rarely shoot wide open to begin with, I typically stop down to 3.5 on a 2.8 lens to get everything tack sharp (most lenses are sharper stopped down and 3.5 on a longer lens like the 70-200mm still produces plenty of bokeh) and usually shoot wide open only in low light situations. I've also found that 3.5 on the 70-200mm at 1/200 with a 2 or 4 stop ND filter combined with a 600WS studio strobe is the perfect combination for sunset portrait shoots.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 30, 2020)

herein2020 said:


> Truly not trying to be funny (I know nothing about birding) but why would you shoot wide open in that scenario? I would drop down to 7.1 or higher since its a moving object, and there isn't really a background to blur (if you are shooting into a background that bright). Personally I rarely shoot wide open to begin with, I typically stop down to 3.5 on a 2.8 lens to get everything tack sharp (most lenses are sharper stopped down and 3.5 on a longer lens like the 70-200mm still produces plenty of bokeh) and usually shoot wide open only in low light situations. I've also found that 3.5 on the 70-200mm at 1/200 with a 2 or 4 stop ND filter combined with a 600WS studio strobe is the perfect combination for sunset portrait shoots.



When it comes to my big lens I shoot it wide open because it almost always misses focus when stopped down. On my 50 and 85 these are both 1.8 and I like the look at 1.8. When I tired a 85 1.2 is was to shoot at 1.2, which was a challenge. But aye, I could see the 1/4000 being a issue with the RP, but a ND filter seems to be the answer or 'slow' glass such as f/4.


----------



## herein2020 (May 30, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> When it comes to my big lens I shoot it wide open because it almost always misses focus when stopped down. On my 50 and 85 these are both 1.8 and I like the look at 1.8. When I tired a 85 1.2 is was to shoot at 1.2, which was a challenge. But aye, I could see the 1/4000 being a issue with the RP, but a ND filter seems to be the answer or 'slow' glass such as f/4.



Got it, an ND isn't a cure all either...you think you miss focus now...try adding an ND.


----------



## SteveC (May 31, 2020)

David_E said:


> “Missing” must be judged relative to one’s needs. For _my purposes_, the only thing missing from the Eos RP is GPS, and that’s easily enough fixed in the Lightroom Maps module. _For me_, the RP is a superb camera to take into the field and make research-grade macrophotos.



Indeed you are 100% correct. And in fact if the RP were missing anything I actually _need_ rather than just consider a nice-to-have, I'd never give it any consideration. It's rep is an excellent camera for the price--not feature packed, but solid at doing the primary task of a camera. As such I'll consider it should the R5 end up being more expensive/less feature packed than currently expected. Missing a lot of nice-to-haves, but also missing a huge price. A worthwhile tradeoff, if the R5 features/price ratio turns out to be too low for my liking.


----------



## David_E (May 31, 2020)

I wrote: “‘Missing‘ must be judged relative to one’s needs. For _my purposes_, the only thing missing from the Eos RP is GPS, and that’s easily enough fixed in the Lightroom Maps module. _For me_, the RP is a superb camera to take into the field and make research-grade macrophotos.“


Codebunny said:


> What about the greater than 1/4000 shutter speeds?. I often am shooting 1/6000 or 1/8000 and bumping up the aperture to reduce the light. Are you just using ND filters on the lenses during bright conditions?


You may have missed the parts that read _*For*_ _*my purposes *_and _*For me*_. I haven’t experienced the need for exceptionally high shutter speeds thay you have experienced. I use diffusers in harsh sunlight when I can, try to keep the ISO down, try to shoot at ƒ11 or so. *I made this photo in bright conditions at ƒ11 and 1/1000 sec @ ISO 400* and I’m happy with it. If I expect to need features that my RP doesn’t have, *I use my 5D Mark IV or my 6D Mark II.*


----------



## David_E (May 31, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> _You should be good shooting in a bright day light conditions at ISO100, F2.8, T=1/3200s
> At F1.4, T=1/12800s._


LOL! If you look at my avatar, you will see “Macrophotography.” I don’t require or purposely buy fast lenses. The EF180mm ƒ3.5L is more than fast enough, considering that I mostly use it between ƒ11 and ƒ32.


----------



## Eclipsed (May 31, 2020)

tomtomtom said:


> Wow dude! D'you actually work for Canon? I'm trying to point out that the market changed dramatically, in order to sell the price has to be right. I'm not talking just about Canon. My kit ain't cheap bruv, I'm just not 100% convinced it's worth all that money. I know a lot of people who think the same way. DSLRs age very quickly, too quickly. It's not about how much you spend but what you get. Camera manufacturers want you to spend 4k+ for a semi-pro body every 4 years; roughly. And now change a system as well. Given the economy, the technology and, most of all, the way people consume photography 4k price tag dramatically limits your sales volume. Higher price will not make up for it. It's simple. If this continues the camera as we know it, DSLR, will extinct because of greed of the likes of Canon.
> 
> It should actually be well below 3k. Well below. Producing 7D, 7.5D, 6.25D etc will not help either.


That’s the quality of Economic analysis I expect from one who uses the term “bruv”.


----------



## SecureGSM (May 31, 2020)

David_E said:


> LOL! If you look at my avatar, you will see “Macrophotography.” I don’t require or purposely buy fast lenses. The EF180mm ƒ3.5L is more than fast enough, considering that I mostly use it between ƒ11 and ƒ32.


Hi David, thought that I was responding to Codebunny's post? He shoots BIF at F2.8 wide open as apparently he had a very limited luck Shooting stopped down due to sharpness loss. ( Focus shift???).
I have no doubt that you know your exposures well. Cheers.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 31, 2020)

David_E said:


> I wrote: “‘Missing‘ must be judged relative to one’s needs. For _my purposes_, the only thing missing from the Eos RP is GPS, and that’s easily enough fixed in the Lightroom Maps module. _For me_, the RP is a superb camera to take into the field and make research-grade macrophotos.“
> 
> You may have missed the parts that read _*For*_ _*my purposes *_and _*For me*_. I haven’t experienced the need for exceptionally high shutter speeds thay you have experienced. I use diffusers in harsh sunlight when I can, try to keep the ISO down, try to shoot at ƒ11 or so. *I made this photo in bright conditions at ƒ11 and 1/1000 sec @ ISO 400* and I’m happy with it. If I expect to need features that my RP doesn’t have, *I use my 5D Mark IV or my 6D Mark II.*



I was discussing the max shutter speed as a general point and not specific to you. I am not on the bandwagon that believes the RP is useless. Having passed 1/4000 on many occasions, how that is dealt with was a curiosity. You don’t need to defend your camera.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 31, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Focus shift???



Should add the lens is from 1988.


----------



## padam (May 31, 2020)

The RP with fast primes outside is really not that great even if it does not go over the 1/4000 limit.
The EFCS makes the rendering harsher at high shutter speeds with uneven illumination, using HSS will cause banding and there is no way to turn it off. The R is much better for this purpose.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

edoorn said:


> Well, we'll see. It's obvious the R5 will have the raw processing power to handle complex AF situations, considering the fact it can handle 8K raw video. I think ultimately the 1Dx III will still be the tool for many working pro's in sports and news. For now. Also because the big agencies have tons and tons of EF glass. I also expect it to be the last OVF based 1DX. For me personally, the R5 seems like a match made in heaven; never expected Canon to do something like this.
> 
> I shoot commercial work and portraits, but also events and weddings. And wildlife. It's a one can do all. Apart from that I've also begun working on my video skills to add as service to clients, and that is something this camera can do pretty good too. Not of course as good as a C line camera, but good enough. My faith is large enough I've asked a retailer here to place a pre-pre-order and a custom quote for a couple of bodies and a bag of RF lenses



Exactly how many big agencies are left which issue a multitude of full-time staff photographers a full kit of gear instead of hiring freelancers who must provide their own gear and get paid pennies on the dollar?


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

cayenne said:


> Sounds like you're angry or something....?
> 
> I mean, why not just be happy for those that for the time being still can get a good deal?



Not angry at all. Just pointing out that you are in an ever increasing minority if you're still not having to pay sales tax for online purchases. Most of us in the U.S. now are being charged sales tax at places such as amazon, B&H, and Adorama.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

usern4cr said:


> How about the RF 15-35 f2.8 on one body and the RF 70-135 f2 on the other?  It seems that if you like the 135 f1.8 then you'd love the 70-135 f2 even more.
> 
> I have similar interests, in that I'm buying all new Canon gear, so I'm thinking of 2 bodies and 3 lenses: RF 15-35 f2.8, RF 70-135 f2, and RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1.  I'd really miss the RF 70-200 f2.8 as it's so compact and outstanding, but I don't see a compelling need for it if I do get the 3 lenses I mentioned. What do you think?



Just because a zoom lens is capable of giving you f/2 at 135mm doesn't mean the images you get with it will be as "good" as the images you'll get with an "equivalent" prime lens. I have both the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II and the EF 135mm f/2. One is a 2010 design that released at a price of $2,499, the other is a 1996 design that sold for $1,049 when it debuted. Even if I shoot the 135/2 in the same aperture range as the zoom can do, there's no comparison to the way the backgrounds look from both lenses. If I know I can get away with only 135mm, I'm grabbing the EF 135mm f/2 every single time.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

Kit. said:


> I wonder if such cashback counts as taxable income.



The state of New York is currently in litigation going after B&H over not paying state sales tax on manufacturer "instant rebates." It's really, really murky, because Canon doesn't send B&H a check every time they sell a body with the promotion, they just give them credit towards their future wholesale purchases. The state says the rebate is income for B&H. B&H says it's not because they can only count the actual cost they pay for the replacement inventory as an expense, not what they would have had to pay without the rebate credits.

I can see a scenario where some states will start requiring credit card companies to start issuing form 1099s (or the state equivalent) to cardholders who get cash rewards from credit card companies.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> In general no, cash back (if it fits the IRS definition) is considered a discount not income, discounts are not taxable Income.



That all depends on if the purchase in question is a personal purchase or a business expense included on your Schedule C (or a business expense claimed by a corporation). 

If you buy a camera for $1,999 and B&H charges you $1,999 + 159.92 sales tax = $2,158.92 and you count the $2,158.92 on the invoice from B&H as a business expense on your Schedule C, if the card account holder is a taxpayer included on the return that includes that Schedule C then the cash back from the credit card issuer is considered income.

If your private photography business is incorporated and you pay for the camera using a card issued to you personally, then you'd have to claim the cost of the purchase as an "employee business expense" on your personal return and the cash back as a "taxable employee benefit."


----------



## navastronia (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Just because a zoom lens is capable of giving you f/2 at 135mm doesn't mean the images you get with it will be as "good" as the images you'll get with an "equivalent" prime lens. I have both the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II and the EF 135mm f/2. One is a 2010 design that released at a price of $2,499, the other is a 1996 design that sold for $1,049 when it debuted. Even if I shoot the 135/2 in the same aperture range as the zoom can do, there's no comparison to the way the backgrounds look from both lenses. If I know I can get away with only 135mm, I'm grabbing the EF 135mm f/2 every single time.



100% agree, and while YMMV, my experience was that the zooms I could afford (including copies of the EF 70-200 L IS v. 1 and 2) simply didn't offer performance that justified their use. I now run with canon's EF 85 1.8 and EF 200 2.8. The image quality is much better.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

carina_r31 said:


> There's a retailer in Berlin (Foto Meter) showing the EOS R5 body this weekend. Unfortunately, there won't be a possibility to test the camera. But I'm surprised they're showing the body, since the official announcement didn't take place so far. I don't think there'll be many new informations and they won't know a price for sure (or they won't tell), but I'll have a look at the event tomorrow  really excited nonetheless!



It will probably be under secure glass, just like it was at the conference Canon showed it at right before everything started shutting down.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

David_E said:


> One extra battery in my pocket for insurance (not often needed in my kind of work) and I do just fine with my RP. In _my_ _experience_, it outdoes the R in ergonomics and *it makes quality pics.*



Both the R and the RP have pluses and minuses that will vary from one user to the next based on what they want to do with them. I was merely pointing out one such consideration among many. There's no need for you to take it so personally that the camera you didn't choose for your situation might have an advantage _*for someone else*_ over the camera you did choose. And they both are perfectly capable of being used to _*take quality pictures*_.


----------



## edoorn (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Exactly how many big agencies are left which issue a multitude full-time staff photographers a full kit of gear instead of hiring freelancers who must provide their own gear and get paid pennies on the dollar?


There’s still some over here, like ANP (they chose Canon). But yes, most photo journalists and documentary shooters are freelancers now and get paid crap, true.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

stevelee said:


> Especially in the spring and fall. Because of the collision of continents that caused our former east coast to become mountains and left bits and pieces of other continents, there are areas with more kinds of minerals and gemstones than most other places on earth. The big gold rush before 1849 was just east of here. There are former gold mines under downtown Charlotte. They still could be mined, but the gold available is worth less than the real estate above it.
> 
> About ten miles east of where I grew up was the largest lithium mine in the world for some years. There are places in the mountains with a large variety of gem stones.
> 
> If you dive to our continental shelf, you will find artifacts including arrowheads from the time when sea levels were much lower.



It sounds like you're from the Piedmont area.

I have ancestors that fought at the Battle of Kings Mountain. Their families had already migrated west over the Blue Ridge mountains by the turn of the 19th century. One of my brothers-in-law spent his high school years in Shelby. His father was an industrial engineer in the textiles industry and they moved around North & South Carolina a lot in the '60s and '70s. I've also got a good childhood friend who married a girl from Gastonia and they've lived there for about the past thirty years after we went to college in Nashville and grad school in Kansas City together. Back in the '90s I worked for a transportation company based in Fletcher, NC about ten miles south of Asheville and travelled extensively all over the Carolinas, but particularly in the areas surrounding Asheville, north and east of Rocky Mount, and Sumter. We also had a large customer base in NW South Carolina in all of those small towns that seemed to have a roller bearing or other kind of fine machining operation, from Cowpens, Fountain Inn, Belton, Honea Path, and Anderson all the way up into the foothills at Easley and Pickens.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

Otara said:


> Yes I used to do that with my 7D2. Was great until I wanted to use the OVF instead - I had a flip version which was a mixed experience, sometimes worked very well, other times Id get a dent in my head when I forgot it was there.



I think at least one person in the conversation at the thread I linked above said they found one that flipped out of the way in a direction so they could use the OVF without having to remove the whole thing.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I was stationed at MCAS Cherry Point years ago. I was also there in the mid 1960s when my Dad was stationed there. Beautiful state!



One of my high school bandmates was in the 2nd Marine Division Band at LeJeune for six years in the mid-1980s.


----------



## usern4cr (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Just because a zoom lens is capable of giving you f/2 at 135mm doesn't mean the images you get with it will be as "good" as the images you'll get with an "equivalent" prime lens. I have both the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II and the EF 135mm f/2. One is a 2010 design that released at a price of $2,499, the other is a 1996 design that sold for $1,049 when it debuted. Even if I shoot the 135/2 in the same aperture range as the zoom can do, there's no comparison to the way the backgrounds look from both lenses. If I know I can get away with only 135mm, I'm grabbing the EF 135mm f/2 every single time.


Well, I didn't want to imply that the the RF 70-135 f2 image would be "as good" as your EF 135 f2 prime, as I wouldn't have any way to know that either way.  But the reason I like zooms is that in addition to moving around, I can vary the zoom to the focal length I like to frame that particular picture. I also use the zoom to cover a wide range of focal distances so that I can leave a single lens on the body and not have to change lenses often, and I often walk around with just one camera and lens.

I'm not a professional, and I'm not against adding a prime to my zooms. I do consider getting the RF 85mm f1.2 DS (or possibly without DS) to be my "portrait" lens instead of the RF 70-135 f2. If I did that and also got a future RF 135 prime then I would assume I would get far better portraits that way. If I take a camera backpack I could consider that with a second body so I could still minimize lens changes. 

My additional question was: if I have the RF 70-135 f2 and RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1, then would there be any major benefit to also getting the RF 70-200 f2.8 or not? I know if I ask 5 people this, I'll probably get 7 different opinions. I'm just trying to decide how best to spend my limited amount of money.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

stevelee said:


> My father was called back into the Marines during the Korean War and was at Camp Lejeune, not quite so far out as Cherry Point. He got home every other weekend, carpooling with guys who lived west of us. He never left NC, but trained troops to go to Korea. I was 4 years old. I have letters he sent to Mother discussing what for him to get me for my fifth birthday.




My Dad's oldest brother was in the Marines from 1943 until 1973 and spent most of his time after Korea at LeJeune when he was stateside. He was in artillery from shortly after Korea until he let them make him a Lieutenant two or three years before he retired. They had some kind of program where they sent senior NCOs to OCS because so many young Marine officers were getting chewed up in Vietnam. He saw no combat in WWII (by the end he was in a unit that would have been part of an invasion of mainland Japan). But he was at both Inchon and Chosin in Korea with the 1st Div. and then did three tours in Vietnam with the 2nd Div.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I am basing on f/1.8 where I have ran into issues. But even my f/2.8 300mm has hit 1/6000 at ISO 100. But regardless I was bringing it up as the only downside I see to the RP.



Who says you can only shoot with the aperture wide open? The poster who began this sub-conversation apparently specializes in macro photography which typically likes to use as narrow an aperture as the light and/or diffraction will allow.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

TAF said:


> As an aside, consider the speed of the shutter curtain at 1/8000 of a second. The frame is 24mm high (call it 25mm for the edges), and the curtain transitions across is .000125 seconds. That translates into a velocity of 200,000 mm/sec = 200 m/sec = 447 mi/hr. At 1/16000, it would be supersonic. That's impressive engineering.
> 
> Impressive usually equals costly. So mirrorless should be less expensive. Perhaps the 5R will be less than the 5D4 at introduction?



Mirrorless cameras such as the EOS R, RP, and R5 still have mechanical shutters.

The shutter curtain transit times for FF cameras in the top classes are around 2.5 milliseconds. It's the difference between the first curtain starting to open and the second curtain starting to close that are only 1/8000 second or 0.125 milliseconds apart. But the distance between the first and second curtain is only a narrow slit about 1.2mm wide as they both transit the sensor.

(The video below is of an APS-C 7D, so the sensor height is only 14.9mm, which makes the slit for 1/8000 with a 2.5ms transit time calculate out to 0.75mm, but the way the two shutter curtains chase each other across the frame at exposure times shorter than X-sync is the same.)


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> When it comes to my big lens I shoot it wide open because it almost always misses focus when stopped down. On my 50 and 85 these are both 1.8 and I like the look at 1.8. When I tired a 85 1.2 is was to shoot at 1.2, which was a challenge. But aye, I could see the 1/4000 being a issue with the RP, but a ND filter seems to be the answer or 'slow' glass such as f/4.



You do realize AF is done when the lens is wide open and only stops down while the mirror is moving up? That is unless you are shooting in Live View with exposure simulation enabled.


----------



## David_E (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> There's no need for you to take it so personally that the camera you didn't choose for your situation might have an advantage _*for someone else*_ over the camera you did choose.


By emphasizing “In _my_ experience...” did I not implicitly say that I recognize that everyone has their own needs, YMMV, one size does not fit all?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Who says you can only shoot with the aperture wide open? The poster who began this sub-conversation apparently specializes in macro photography which typically likes to use as narrow an aperture as the light and/or diffraction will allow.



I don't believe anyone said you can only shoot wide open. Though I do have only very old lens that seems to alway miss when stopped down.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> You do realize AF is done when the lens is wide open and only stops down while the mirror is moving up? That is unless you are shooting in Live View with exposure simulation enabled.



Very well aware, but all I can say on this particular lens is it gets a sharp shot at f/2.8 and completely missed at f/5.6. Mirrorless also focus stopped down unless you set it not to preview the exposure at least on the mirrorless I have, switching off this preview makes It focus wide open and only stops down on shutter press.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I think the area of NC where I live is in exotic zone where you can’t tell what part is Africa and what is South America, or something like that. Africa is to our east, and mountains from the collision are west of us. I think some of our mountains wound up in Morocco.



Most of the maps I've looked at of Pangaea would place the Moroccan coastal mountains against the area around Newfoundland. What is now coastal Carolina is more aligned with the area around present day Senegal and Guinea which are more geologically like the "low country" of the Carolina coast.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

usern4cr said:


> Well, I didn't want to imply that the the RF 70-135 f2 image would be "as good" as your EF 135 f2 prime, as I wouldn't have any way to know that either way.  But the reason I like zooms is that in addition to moving around, I can vary the zoom to the focal length I like to frame that particular picture. I also use the zoom to cover a wide range of focal distances so that I can leave a single lens on the body and not have to change lenses often, and I often walk around with just one camera and lens.



Zooms certainly have their uses. I use zooms more often than primes. But it is a mistake to assume that an RF 70-135mm f/2 at 135/2 will look the same as an RF 135mm f/1.8 at 135/2. Every lens must be evaluated on the basis of its own design.



usern4cr said:


> I'm not a professional, and I'm not against adding a prime to my zooms. I do consider getting the RF 85mm f1.2 DS (or possibly without DS) to be my "portrait" lens instead of the RF 70-135 f2. If I did that and also got a future RF 135 prime then I would assume I would get far better portraits that way. If I take a camera backpack I could consider that with a second body so I could still minimize lens changes.
> 
> My additional question was: if I have the RF 70-135 f2 and RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1, then would there be any major benefit to also getting the RF 70-200 f2.8 or not? I know if I ask 5 people this, I'll probably get 7 different opinions. I'm just trying to decide how best to spend my limited amount of money.



My advice would be for you to get neither version of the RF 85mm f/1.2 nor an RF 135mm. If you do, you're going to wind up spending a LOT more money on a bunch of prime lenses than you would spend on a couple of zooms, even if the zooms are more expensive on a per lens basis.


----------



## SecureGSM (May 31, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Very well aware, but all I can say on this particular lens is it gets a sharp shot at f/2.8 and completely missed at f/5.6. Mirrorless also focus stopped down unless you set it not to preview the exposure at least on the mirrorless I have, switching off this preview makes It focus wide open and only stops down on shutter press.



++++ Mirrorless also focus stopped down unless you set it not to

A.M.: The Canon EOS R focuses with the aperture wide open;

Most other mirrorless systems operate fully stopped down when focusing.


----------



## stevelee (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> It sounds like you're from the Piedmont area.
> 
> I have ancestors that fought at the Battle of Kings Mountain. Their families had already migrated west over the Blue Ridge mountains by the turn of the 19th century. One of my brothers-in-law spent his high school years in Shelby. His father was an industrial engineer in the textiles industry and they moved around North & South Carolina a lot in the '60s and '70s. I've also got a good childhood friend who married a girl from Gastonia and they've lived there for about the past thirty years after we went to college in Nashville and grad school in Kansas City together. Back in the '90s I worked for a transportation company based in Fletcher, NC about ten miles south of Asheville and travelled extensively all over the Carolinas, but particularly in the areas surrounding Asheville, north and east of Rocky Mount, and Sumter. We also had a large customer base in NW South Carolina in all of those small towns that seemed to have a roller bearing or other kind of fine machining operation, from Cowpens, Fountain Inn, Belton, Honea Path, and Anderson all the way up into the foothills at Easley and Pickens.


Yes, I was born and grew up in Shelby. My father worked in a textile mill. A great-great-great-great-great-grandfather was a colonel at the battle of Kings Mountain. My Lee ancestor fought at Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse. I lived in Kings Mountain 30 years ago. Before I retired, I lived in Cramerton, just east of Gastonia. Except for grad school in Texas, I’ve always lived in Piedmont NC. I now live in Davidson, a small college town just north of Charlotte.


----------



## stevelee (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Most of the maps I've looked at of Pangaea would place the Moroccan coastal mountains against the area around Newfoundland. What is now coastal Carolina is more aligned with the area around present day Senegal and Guinea which are more geologically like the "low country" of the Carolina coast.


The mountain chain goes all the way up at least to Maine, so continuing in Morocco seems about right.


----------



## Durf (May 31, 2020)

stevelee said:


> Yes, I was born and grew up in Shelby. My father worked in a textile mill. A great-great-great-great-great-grandfather was a colonel at the battle of Kings Mountain. My Lee ancestor fought at Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse. I lived in Kings Mountain 30 years ago. Before I retired, I lived in Cramerton, just east of Gastonia. Except for grad school in Texas, I’ve always lived in Piedmont NC. I now live in Davidson, a small college town just north of Charlotte.


 I'm in N. Ga and can be in NC in less than 5 minutes from where I live now. I've been in Western NC and N GA for 32 years now and this area is truly a nature photographers paradise (and then some!). One doesn't have to go far to capture a majestic landscape image (right out my back door). 
I work a lot in the Highlands/Cashiers area but live about 70 miles west from there. Beautiful country!


----------



## David_E (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Most of the maps I've looked at of Pangaea would place the Moroccan coastal mountains against the area around Newfoundland. What is now coastal Carolina is more aligned with the area around present day Senegal and Guinea which are more geologically like the "low country" of the Carolina coast.


The Appalachians run from Nova Scotia to Alabama. There are rocks in both Scotland and the Lesser Atlas Mountains of Morocco that formed in the same time and place as certain rocks in the Appalachians.


----------



## stevelee (May 31, 2020)

Durf said:


> I'm in N. Ga and can be in NC in less than 5 minutes from where I live now. I've been in Western NC and N GA for 32 years now and this area is truly a nature photographers paradise (and then some!). One doesn't have to go far to capture a majestic landscape image (right out my back door).
> I work a lot in the Highlands/Cashiers area but live about 70 miles west from there. Beautiful country!


There are a lot of beautiful waterfalls in the area along US 64 especially.


----------



## SteveC (May 31, 2020)

David_E said:


> The Appalachians run from Nova Scotia to Alabama. There are rocks in both Scotland and the Lesser Atlas Mountains of Morocco that formed in the same time and place as certain rocks in the Appalachians.



The chain actually runs up through present day Scotland and into Norway. The Atlantic Rift sliced right through the range.


----------



## stevelee (May 31, 2020)

SteveC said:


> The chain actually runs up through present day Scotland and into Norway. The Atlantic Rift sliced right through the range.


Maybe that is why so many Scots and Scots-Irish felt at home here.


----------



## Kit. (May 31, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> When it comes to my big lens I shoot it wide open because it almost always misses focus when stopped down.


I have never seen such a behavior and don't understand how it could be physically possible (as long as we aren't diffraction limited).

If the lens is unsharp wide open, it is possible that some other plane will become more sharp than the prefocused one currently is (or even will become), but it's not like the prefocused plane _itself_ will become _less sharp_ when you close the diaphragm.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (May 31, 2020)

Kit. said:


> I have never seen such a behavior and don't understand how it could be physically possible (as long as we aren't diffraction limited).
> 
> If the lens is unsharp wide open, it is possible that some other plane will become more sharp than the prefocused one currently is (or even will become), but it's not like the prefocused plane _itself_ will become _less sharp_ when you close the diaphragm.


Yes it doesn’t make sense, but it is the behaviour I have had with it or at least i put it down to being stopped down. I have since moved to back button AF so I’ll try stopping it down incase it was just alway refocusing. While 30 years old, it is still my favourite lens. Also the behaviour was not present on my 7d, started on my now dead 5dII, and I haven’t dared stop it down on my 90D


----------



## Random Orbits (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Your kids' soccer games must have been in daylight!



That is true!


----------



## dave441 (May 31, 2020)

It needs to be in the 3500 mark Canadian. Camera sales are crashing for Nikon and Sony. An expensive camera at this time, when few can get jobs, and it will be another nail in the coffin of all three companies.


----------



## brad-man (May 31, 2020)

dave441 said:


> It needs to be in the 3500 mark Canadian. Camera sales are crashing for Nikon and Sony. An expensive camera at this time, when few can get jobs, and it will be another nail in the coffin of all three companies.


Relax Dave. Canon isn't going anywhere near a grave. The others? Time will tell.


----------



## HarryFilm (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Yeah, that's what 180° shutter angle means.



Yes! From a Cinema point of view I do know what Shutter angle is === I HAVE SHOT Arriflex 435 and Arriflex 765 ___ FILM ____ cameras !!!

But most people have NO IDEA what a rotating shutter blade looks like. The ONLY reason I do because I've shot lots of film myself on 8 mm, 16 mm, 35 mm and 65/70 mm stock -- The parent company STILL has a few 8 mm, 16 mm and 35 mm Arriflex 435 ES cameras we've kept from the old days (they are in PRISTINE ready-to-use configuration!) I'm still waiting to buy a Arriflex 765 65/70mm film camera once one becomes available!

With digital cameras, it's all about ISO sensor sensitivity and Shutter SPEED! Actual Shutter Angle in Degrees Open does NOT come into play here!

---

HOWEVER .... On a purely mechanical, somebody COULD CNC or 3D-print an actual rotating shutter blade with the requisite shutter angles setup for typical Hollywood use on ANY DSLR, Mirrorless and/or Digital Cinema Camera! It CAN be done!

It would be an interesting project to do for a Hollywood cinema enthusiast!

A rotating shutter blade system for an 8k R5 Mirrorless camera? --- A Cool Idea In My Book !!!!



V


----------



## Eclipsed (May 31, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Not angry at all. Just pointing out that you are in an ever increasing minority if you're still not having to pay sales tax for online purchases. Most of us in the U.S. now are being charged sales tax at places such as amazon, B&H, and Adorama.


I’m tempted to get a mailbox in Oregon. Costs to ship it forward but a big white lens with a $1000 sales tax bill can justify it.
I’m happy to have found Fred Miranda and the agreeable buyers and sellers there. Got my RF50f1.2 and RF24-70f2.8 that way for ~2/3 of retail. R5 will be BH Payboo.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

David_E said:


> By emphasizing “In _my_ experience...” did I not implicitly say that I recognize that everyone has their own needs, YMMV, one size does not fit all?



Yet you were replying to a comment that started with, "If you're also considering adding other bodies that use the more ubiquitous LP-E6/LP-E6N/LP-E6x..." so I'm not seeing how what you said was relevant to that context, unless it was to "defend" the choice you made about the camera _you chose for you_.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

David_E said:


> The Appalachians run from Nova Scotia to Alabama. There are rocks in both Scotland and the Lesser Atlas Mountains of Morocco that formed in the same time and place as certain rocks in the Appalachians.



Yes, there are. And the mountains that are now in Morocco broke off from what now ends at Nova Scotia, and the mountains now in Scotland were past the ones now in Morocco. That's almost the opposite end of a 1,400 miles/2,250 km long chain as it now exists in North America from what is now part of North Carolina. There's also a short section that was between what is now in Nova Scotia and what is now in Morocco that is under the Atlantic Ocean somewhere.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

stevelee said:


> There are a lot of beautiful waterfalls in the area along US 64 especially.



I was at Looking Glass Falls just out of Brevard for about an hour this past summer. I chose to take the scenic route from South Carolina to Tennessee. I came out of Greenville, SC on U.S. 276 and took it all the way to Waynesville before cutting across some local roads to connect with I-40 east of the Pigeon River Gorge. I would have also stopped just up the road at Sliding Rock, which I last visited in 1986, if the parking lot had not already been full and closed before noon.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

Durf said:


> I'm in N. Ga and can be in NC in less than 5 minutes from where I live now. I've been in Western NC and N GA for 32 years now and this area is truly a nature photographers paradise (and then some!). One doesn't have to go far to capture a majestic landscape image (right out my back door).
> I work a lot in the Highlands/Cashiers area but live about 70 miles west from there. Beautiful country!



While working out of western NC in the 1990s I made the trip Down U.S. 23 out of NC into GA several times on my way down to Athens, GA. I've always wanted to go back to the area around Tallulah Falls with time to stop and spend a day or two there.


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> I’m tempted to get a mailbox in Oregon. Costs to ship it forward but a big white lens with a $1000 sales tax bill can justify it.
> I’m happy to have found Fred Miranda and the agreeable buyers and sellers there. Got my RF50f1.2 and RF24-70f2.8 that way for ~2/3 of retail. R5 will be BH Payboo.



Yeah. I've got a college friend who now lives in Delaware. But he's a photography enthusiast who also shoots Canon and if I had anything shipped to his house to forward to me he'd just keep it!


----------



## Michael Clark (May 31, 2020)

brad-man said:


> Relax Dave. Canon isn't going anywhere near a grave. The others? Time will tell.



For them to survive they're going to have to be willing to downsize their manufacturing workforce in Japan significantly. That's something not easy to do for Japanese companies, who typically keep employees for life. In the long term it will also mean there will be a danger that their most knowledgeable workers will be aging and approaching retirement at the same time with no younger apprentices coming in to whom they can pass down their wisdom.


----------



## David_E (May 31, 2020)

padam said:


> _The RP with fast primes outside is really not that great even if it does not go over the 1/4000 limit.
> The EFCS makes the rendering harsher at high shutter speeds with uneven illumination, using HSS will cause banding and there is no way to turn it off._


How long have you owned your RP and which “fast primes” have you used on it? Could you post a photo that you made that illustrates the “not that great” issue that you raised? Many thanks!


----------



## padam (Jun 1, 2020)

David_E said:


> How long have you owned your RP and which “fast primes” have you used on it? Could you post a photo that you made that illustrates the “not that great” issue that you raised? Many thanks!


I have owned it for about three months alongside the EOS R, which was the one I've kept and it behaves exactly the same way, except you can turn EFCS off (or use electronic shutter, which is also next to useless on the RP) and avoid the issues altogether (and ND filter also works, but it is an even bigger hassle). I have more than 10 fast primes, mainly vintage ones, but I saw it with the RF 28-70/2 as well.

Of course RP owners will say it is not a big deal, so it is personal paste (but I don't see a point in spending a lot on a fast RF lens to compromise its rendering on the RP) examples are out there, it depends on many factors but in actual use there will be a situation where it will be distracting.


----------



## TAF (Jun 1, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Mirrorless cameras such as the EOS R, RP, and R5 still have mechanical shutters.
> 
> The shutter curtain transit times for FF cameras in the top classes are around 2.5 milliseconds. It's the difference between the first curtain starting to open and the second curtain starting to close that are only 1/8000 second or 0.125 milliseconds apart. But the distance between the first and second curtain is only a narrow slit about 1.2mm wide as they both transit the sensor.
> 
> (The video below is of an APS-C 7D, so the sensor height is only 14.9mm, which makes the slit for 1/8000 with a 2.5ms transit time calculate out to 0.75mm, but the way the two shutter curtains chase each other across the frame at exposure times shorter than X-sync is the same.)



Thank you very much for posting that. Much clearer now.


----------



## stevelee (Jun 1, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> I was at Looking Glass Falls just out of Brevard for about an hour this past summer. I chose to take the scenic route from South Carolina to Tennessee. I came out of Greenville, SC on U.S. 276 and took it all the way to Waynesville before cutting across some local roads to connect with I-40 east of the Pigeon River Gorge. I would have also stopped just up the road at Sliding Rock, which I last visited in 1986, if the parking lot had not already been full and closed before noon.



The Cradle of Forestry in America is on 276 between Brevard and Waynesville. I haven't been there in 25 years, but I recall that it was really interesting. If you ever get back that way, I suggest you check it out.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 1, 2020)

stevelee said:


> Yes, I was born and grew up in Shelby. My father worked in a textile mill. A great-great-great-great-great-grandfather was a colonel at the battle of Kings Mountain. My Lee ancestor fought at Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse. I lived in Kings Mountain 30 years ago. Before I retired, I lived in Cramerton, just east of Gastonia. Except for grad school in Texas, I’ve always lived in Piedmont NC. I now live in Davidson, a small college town just north of Charlotte.



The same ancestors (a father and son, I'm not certain off the top of my head how many "greats" there are between they and I) that fought at King's Mountain also were at Cowpens. Not sure about Guilford Courthouse. Several of the younger one had sons and grandsons, one of whom is my direct ancestor, that were living in what is now Sevier County Tennessee and served under John Cocke and then Andy Jackson in the Creek War and the War of 1812 (which, ironically, didn't really get going that far south as direct conflict between Americans and British until after the Creek War ended in mid-1814).

My childhood friend pastors a church on Redbud Drive on the east side of Gastonia that's not too far from Cramerton. He was also a staff chaplain at CaroMont Regional in Gastonia for a number of years. His wife's parents live in Belmont, or at least they still did back in the 1990s. Her father was one of the air traffic controllers that got fired for going on strike back in the 1980s. He was working the tower at Charlotte-Douglas at the time.


----------



## stevelee (Jun 1, 2020)

I have several old friends who live in Gastonia. When I go see any of them, I take Redbud Drive to go to their homes. The road changes names three times before I get there.

I realize that all this must be fascinating to people who come to the thread to find out how much they are likely to pay for a new camera.


----------



## David_E (Jun 1, 2020)

padam said:


> _I have owned it for about three months alongside the EOS R, which was the one I've kept and it behaves exactly the same way, except you can turn EFCS off (or use electronic shutter, which is also next to useless on the RP) and avoid the issues altogether (and ND filter also works, but it is an even bigger hassle). I have more than 10 fast primes, mainly vintage ones, but I saw it with the RF 28-70/2 as well.
> 
> Of course RP owners will say it is not a big deal, so it is personal paste _[] _(but I don't see a point in spending a lot on a fast RF lens to compromise its rendering on the RP) examples are out there, it depends on many factors but in actual use there will be a situation where it will be distracting._


I am in no way dissing the problem that you describe as not a big deal, but you can understand why someone like me who has never seen it and who had never heard of it, would be unlikely to give it much thought. My only primes are my macro lenses and I shoot stopped down. My macros can’t use filters, as they have Ring Lite mounting flanges attached to the filter threads. Agree that NDs are a pain in the neck. I own a couple, have not used an ND since maybe the early 1970’s. As for primes vs. zooms, I dropped out of that discussion in 1980. No one _ever_ looked at one of my photos and said “you should have used a prime.”


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jun 2, 2020)

This camera seems like it is never coming and why are they so secretive? You want to sell it or not? Is it finished or not?


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jun 2, 2020)

RayValdez360 said:


> This camera seems like it is never coming and why are they so secretive? You want to sell it or not? Is it finished or not?



I'm not sure how many people are in the market for a camera right now. Perhaps waiting or pushing things back might be better to hopefully see how things go. A lot of working pros have nothing to shoot right now, nobody is travelling and a global supply chain in semiconductors and tech are at risk from two world leaders throwing sand at each other in the children's sandbox.

Better times ahead hopefully.. I'm waiting for the R5 and Sony's response to it so the bitter rivalry can start back up soon..


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jun 2, 2020)

jayphotoworks said:


> I'm not sure how many people are in the market for a camera right now. Perhaps waiting or pushing things back might be better to hopefully see how things go. A lot of working pros have nothing to shoot right now, nobody is travelling and a global supply chain in semiconductors and tech are at risk from two world leaders throwing sand at each other in the children's sandbox.
> 
> Better times ahead hopefully.. I'm waiting for the R5 and Sony's response to it so the bitter rivalry can start back up soon..


Promote now so when people get the money and business back rolling, they know what they want.


----------



## Jayk0607 (Jun 2, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If the vendor collects tax from you, then you do not have to pay it again, do you? Isn't the receipt more or less documentation of a tax credit that you've already paid in that regard?


I meant to say you have to pay tax if the vendor has not collected.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jun 2, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Transit time for Tokyo or Yokohama to Long Beach was typically 11 days before the Covid shutdown. Allow a bit less than a week on each end for getting them processed in/out of the port facility and on/off the ship. Then it's all up to how long it takes to clear customs.


Freight leadtimes are all over the place at the moment with Covid-19. Customs are separate of course.


----------



## Jayk0607 (Jun 2, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II was $2,499 USD at launch in March of 2010 but dropped to $2,299 by late summer. It went back up to $2,499 for most of 2011 and again from mid-2013 to mid-2014. It didn't drop to $2,099 (without a temporary promotional incentive) until about five years after introduction in mid-2015.
> 
> If you got your prices from the Wikipedia article, the prices of the discontinued lenses all appear to be their official MSRP (before promotional discounts) when they were replaced, not when they were introduced. The prices for the lenses still in the catalog also appear to be their current MSRP (before promotional "instant rebates") and not their introductory prices.


I used the Wikipedia for most part and I did not really verify the launch price separately, hence I said a 'quick chart'. Then I assume the 2020 inflation adjusted price should be much higher. But now I'm too lazy to go back and fix it.


----------



## David_E (Jun 2, 2020)

SteveC said:


> The [Appalachian] chain actually runs up through present day Scotland and into Norway. The Atlantic Rift sliced right through the range.


There are relatively small areas of Appalachian rocks in Scotland, but the chain does not “run through” Scotland. “In the nineteen-forties, a professor at Delft had written a book called _The Pulse of the Earth..._“
‘The whole ocean is virtually swept clean (replaced by new mantle material) every three hundred to four hundred million years,‘ he wrote, not then suspecting that *ocean crust is actually consumed in half that time*.” —Annals of the Former World, Book 1, by John McPhee. In fact, the Appalachians formed about 480 million years ago, while the oldest oceanic crust is about 200 million y.o., so that the Atlantic floor has been swept clean at least twice in the age of the Appalachians. Furthermore, the spreading Atlantic crust created (is still creating) *new* rock from the mantle, pushing apart land masses on either side of the mid-ocean ridge. The new crust did/does not leave in place or cover existing geological features. As for Norway, could you refer me to a source on the claim that Appalachian rocks exist there? I was unaware of that.


----------



## Billybob (Jun 2, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The α9 also tops out at 10 fps when using a mechanical shutter. 20 FPS is only available with electronic shutter (and the rolling shutter effect) with a fairly short list of Sony lenses. A few other Sony lenses reduce the max frame rate to around 15 fps with electronic shutter. The rest limit the camera to around 10 fps, even when using electronic shutter or when using adapted non-Sony lenses.


I'm not sure how your comment responded to my comment. Nonetheless, the limits of the A9 series that you mention along with the relatively low maximum resolution is the reason that I'm considering the R5. Frankly, 10fps mechanical is sufficient for my purposes. I love the blackout-free continuous shooting (not sure if the R5 is going to get this feature). However, I want a camera that can shoot at 10fps or faster mechanical and has at least 36MP of resolution. The A7r cameras come close to this mechanical rate but do not provide the higher electronic continuous rate. 

So, waiting to see what the R5 has to offer. If it's significantly better than the A7Riii, I'll consider adding it to my kit. If not, then sticking with Sony is not a bad option.


----------



## SteveC (Jun 2, 2020)

David_E said:


> There are relatively small areas of Appalachian rocks in Scotland, but the chain does not “run through” Scotland. “In the nineteen-forties, a professor at Delft had written a book called _The Pulse of the Earth..._“
> ‘The whole ocean is virtually swept clean (replaced by new mantle material) every three hundred to four hundred million years,‘ he wrote, not then suspecting that *ocean crust is actually consumed in half that time*.” —Annals of the Former World, Book 1, by John McPhee. In fact, the Appalachians formed about 480 million years ago, while the oldest oceanic crust is about 200 million y.o., so that the Atlantic floor has been swept clean at least twice in the age of the Appalachians. Furthermore, the spreading Atlantic crust created (is still creating) *new* rock from the mantle, pushing apart land masses on either side of the mid-ocean ridge. The new crust did/does not leave in place or cover existing geological features. As for Norway, could you refer me to a source on the claim that Appalachian rocks exist there? I was unaware of that.



I suppose I should have said "ran through." The same uplift that caused the Appalachians brought on the Scottish Highlands and the Atlas Mountains (I appear to have been wrong about Norway; if so, then so was the professor who made the assertion in a lecture I watched). The ranges were at one time connected.

Clearly they aren't connected now, and if that's how you read my statement "runs through" then my apologies. It can't be so, of course because as I _did_ say, the mid Atlantic rift sliced the sucker in two. The floor of the ocean, as you correctly note, was created later as the rift spread (it's mostly if not entirely closer in time to us than it is to the original uplift of the Appalachians) and thus couldn't possibly have those mountains on it at all. I knew this; I just conveyed my meaning *very* poorly.

The Scandinavian range in Norway appears to be of much later origin, so I stand corrected insofar as that goes.


----------



## stevelee (Jun 2, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I suppose I should have said "ran through." The same uplift that caused the Appalachians brought on the Scottish Highlands and the Atlas Mountains (I appear to have been wrong about Norway; if so, then so was the professor who made the assertion in a lecture I watched). The ranges were at one time connected.


A college classmate of mine did a series of programs over the years for the UNC public TV stations called "Exploring North Carolina." Their various channels will rerun the programs, and last night one showed his program on clay. The state is covered in clay formed by the eroding mountains. Much of the Piedmont is covered in red mud. Bricks and pottery have been resultant products. Seagrove near the center of the state is widely known for its potters, and the episode began with showing photos of one of the second or third generation of the pioneering families. His grandson was interviewed on the show. He still is an active potter. When I lived in that area, I got to know some of the families. The Uwharrie mountains there were a coastal range that towered to 20,000 feet. Of course they have weathered down to 1100 feet or less and are nowhere near the coast because of the coastal plain from the erosions and isostasy. According to Wikipedia, they were formed "approximately 500 million years ago by accretion along the Gondwanan tectonic plate." So they are older than the Appalachians, and of course much, much older than the Rockies. The NC gold rush started in that area.


----------



## SteveC (Jun 3, 2020)

Gold in North Carolina:

Here is a half eagle ($5; originally an "eagle" was defined to be ten dollars, one hundred dimes, a thousand cents, ten thousand mills) minted in Charlotte; note the "C" above the date.

http://images.davidlawrence.com/productimagesCDN/430xxx/430154_o.jpg

There was a similar mint in Dahlonega, Georgia. Both shut down at the beginning of the Civil War.


----------



## stevelee (Jun 3, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Gold in North Carolina:
> 
> Here is a half eagle ($5; originally an "eagle" was defined to be ten dollars, one hundred dimes, a thousand cents, ten thousand mills) minted in Charlotte; note the "C" above the date.
> 
> ...


The Charlotte mint was moved out into a residential area and turned into a museum. It is still part of a larger complex, and now there is another branch downtown. The federal courthouse sits on the old mint site.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 3, 2020)

Billybob said:


> I'm not sure how your comment responded to my comment. Nonetheless, the limits of the A9 series that you mention along with the relatively low maximum resolution is the reason that I'm considering the R5. Frankly, 10fps mechanical is sufficient for my purposes. I love the blackout-free continuous shooting (not sure if the R5 is going to get this feature). However, I want a camera that can shoot at 10fps or faster mechanical and has at least 36MP of resolution. The A7r cameras come close to this mechanical rate but do not provide the higher electronic continuous rate.
> 
> So, waiting to see what the R5 has to offer. If it's significantly better than the A7Riii, I'll consider adding it to my kit. If not, then sticking with Sony is not a bad option.



My main purpose was to observe that with many E-mount and all adapted lenses the α9 is no faster than the fastest of the α7 series. It's only really fast with electronic shutter and a handful of the most expensive E-mount lenses.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 3, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Freight leadtimes are all over the place at the moment with Covid-19. Customs are separate of course.



With the coronavirus they're not even sailing on a seven or eight day interval any more. So port arrival to departure can take longer as well. But the actual "sea voyage" is still about 11 days once the ship sails.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Jun 3, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> One will have to shoot the video with the intention of only using it for frame grabs if they wish to use a "sports rated" exposure time. At 1/1000 second video will look very choppy. If they use "video rated" exposure times/180° shutter angle, then frame grabs will suffer immensely from subject motion blur.


Just a brief visit here, no time: that's exactly what I meant. I'd shoot short video sequences with 1/1000 s or so for frame grabbing, not for use as a video.


----------



## Otara (Jun 4, 2020)

Billybob said:


> I love the blackout-free continuous shooting (not sure if the R5 is going to get this feature).



The R already has this feature, but it only works with the RF lenses with the High speed display enabled or when using electronic mode. I suspect this will be the same with the R5 unfortunately.


----------



## canonmike (Jun 4, 2020)

David_E said:


> “Missing” must be judged relative to one’s needs. For _my purposes_, the only thing missing from the Eos RP is GPS, and that’s easily enough fixed in the Lightroom Maps module. _For me_, the RP is a superb camera to take into the field and make research-grade macrophotos.


Your comment reminds me with a reality check that one's gear perspective may be different from the next, based on your particular needs. That's why it is so nice to have choices. In the end, if a model works for you, that's what you go with and if it's priced low as well, it'll put a smile on your face too. Speaking from experience, I know that, at one time or another, I have bought the latest and greatest, darned be the price, only to find out later that I didn't use half of the features found, then discovering that I a lower priced model would have worked for me. Thanks for that reminder.


----------



## briangus (Jun 4, 2020)

Canon Australia have this page up - Coming Soon

https://www.canon.com.au/cameras/eos-r5


----------



## canonmike (Jun 4, 2020)

stevelee said:


> There are a lot of beautiful waterfalls in the area along US 64 especially.


Completely concur. Prior to my moving to S.C., I lived in the Blue Ridge, Ga. area of the N. Ga. Mtns, for about 5 yrs. While there, I was one of the Benton MacKaye Trail maintainers. The Olympic whitewater area on Hwy 64, located about 5 mi west of Ducktown, Tn, is a photographer's dream paradise and some of my trail maintenance trips took us through the gorge located there. Absolutely breathtaking area of E. Tn and I so miss being able to hike and photograph there. During the summer months, there is an explosion of activity, as you will have to share the area with rafters and kayakers coming from all over to experience this paradise found on the Ocoee River. In the winter months, you will frequently find yourself the only one there, as you embrace the solitude. For those of you who have visited or the fortunate ones still living there, no further explanation is necessary.


----------



## Billybob (Jun 4, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> My main purpose was to observe that with many E-mount and all adapted lenses the α9 is no faster than the fastest of the α7 series. It's only really fast with electronic shutter and a handful of the most expensive E-mount lenses.



Calling 22 lenses "only a handful" is--to put it mildly--disingenuous. 

Regardless, so, you're saying that the A9 has limitations. Does that make it any less fast? Your comment is akin to criticizing a sports car that goes 0-60 in 3.5sec for knocks and pings and a rough ride when you don't put premium fuel in it, or more to the point, that a Nikon d500 only provides unlimited continuous shooting when you use an XQD card rather than a SD card. 

Maximum performance often requires matching and appropriate inputs/accessories. Looking at the list of 20fps supported lens, I see every Sony lens I have or would want to use for sports/action photography listed including some that I wouldn't use like the 12-24 (why I'd want fast continuous for an ultrawide is beyond me, but it's on the list), and the cheap 50mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8. The only Sony I have that's not on the list is the 55mm 1.8, no big lost. It appears that only older " economy" lenses are missing like Sony's f/4 16-35 , 24-70, 70-200, and 70-300 lenses. For any photographer likely to want/need 20fps, there are 85, 100,135, 400, and 600 primes, and 16-35, 24-70, 24-105 (comparable in price to other 24-105), 100-400, and 200-600 zooms. You consider this selection problematic? Let me know what Canon offers in RF mount that matches this selection at the same or lower price levels. You can't. 

Thus, yes, the A9 is a speed camera. It does have some limitations, but for most circumstances, it's about as fast as it gets. As I mentioned, the only reason I haven't purchased the A9 and am considering the R5 is that I want the resolution that the R5 offers as well as the performance. However, your post is helping to crystalize my thinking. It will be years and years before Canon offers the selection that Sony currently offers, and the prices of RF lenses are mind-boggling. The only "sports" lens I have in EF mount is the 100-400. For me, Canon will need to announce a compelling sports lens (like a 500 or 600mm DO) in RF for me to jump.


----------



## Billybob (Jun 4, 2020)

Otara said:


> The R already has this feature, but it only works with the RF lenses with the High speed display enabled or when using electronic mode. I suspect this will be the same with the R5 unfortunately.


That's similar to Sony and to be expected. The difference is that Sony has almost 2-dozen lenses compatible with this feature, and Canon is playing catchup.


----------



## Otara (Jun 4, 2020)

Billybob said:


> That's similar to Sony and to be expected. The difference is that Sony has almost 2-dozen lenses compatible with this feature, and Canon is playing catchup.



I barely notice in practise to be honest, and love that I can use all my old lenses so easily, but Im sure it will be very important to some.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 5, 2020)

briangus said:


> Canon Australia have this page up - Coming Soon
> 
> https://www.canon.com.au/cameras/eos-r5



Nothing there that wasn't already revealed in the two announcements made by Canon in January and March. I know not if that page has been up that long in Australia, but at least some of the other Canon regionals have had similar pages up since shortly after the March announcement that was originally scheduled for the NAB trade show.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 5, 2020)

Billybob said:


> Calling 22 lenses "only a handful" is--to put it mildly--disingenuous.
> 
> Regardless, so, you're saying that the A9 has limitations. Does that make it any less fast? Your comment is akin to criticizing a sports car that goes 0-60 in 3.5sec for knocks and pings and a rough ride when you don't put premium fuel in it, or more to the point, that a Nikon d500 only provides unlimited continuous shooting when you use an XQD card rather than a SD card.
> 
> ...



Nice to know they've expanded the list. The last time I looked there were only ten or twelve on it for shooting in AF-C mode. There are still an awful lot of asterisks peppered all over that page.

In the interest of fairness I should also correct an error I made in my previous comment. With mechanical shutter, the maximum frame rate of the α9 is 5 fps, not 10.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jun 5, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Nice to know they've expanded the list. The last time I looked there were only ten or twelve on it. There are still an awful lot of asterisks peppered all over that page.
> 
> In the interest of fairness I should also correct an error I made in my previous comment. With mechanical shutter, the maximum frame rate of the α9 is 5 fps, not 10.



++++With mechanical shutter, the maximum frame rate of the α9 is 5 fps, not 10.

Yeah right ok. How do you eliminate Rolling shutter effect while shooting action with electronic shutter though? A genuine question. shooting fast action at 5 FPS does not sound adequate?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jun 5, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> ++++With mechanical shutter, the maximum frame rate of the α9 is 5 fps, not 10.
> 
> Yeah right ok. How do you eliminate Rolling shutter effect while shooting action with electronic shutter though? A genuine question. shooting fast action at 5 FPS does not sound adequate?



Sony claims their electronic shutter doesn't suffer from the same effect that plagues everyone else's electronic shutter. Independent reviewers are mixed as to just how true that claim is. There's no doubt the Sony sensor reads out faster than other, older sensors used in other cameras. There are varying opinions as to whether the reduced rolling shutter effect still demonstrated is acceptable or not for certain use cses, such as sports and action.


----------

