# Round-up: All of the rumored Canon gear to appear over the last week



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 2, 2020)

> The last week has seen a flurry of new rumors and speculation about Canon’s plans in 2020. This is just a round-up of all we have learned over the last week or so.
> *Canon EOS R5*
> 
> 45mp full-frame CMOS
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## AaronT (Feb 2, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


I have a 5DsR and would like more megapixels than have more fps. I'm not interested in the video at all. Another stop of DR would be nice, but, I still manage to get good photos without it. That's just me.


----------



## Trankilstef (Feb 2, 2020)

The question I ask myself is what is considered the more video centric camera between the R5 and R6 cameras? Looking at the specs it should be the R5 but mybe the video functions like the 8k or the 4k120 will have major crop, and on the opposite the low megapixel and specs of the R6 make it a mini 1dX MkIII? I really don't know how to consider either of thes rumored cameras in the Canon lineup.


----------



## wockawocka (Feb 2, 2020)

The R6 interests me a lot for weddings.


----------



## WhereDoWeGoFrmHere (Feb 2, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> The R6 interests me a lot for weddings.


If it comes with 2 card slots it would suit my needs for event work quite well. But I doubt it will.


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 2, 2020)

Really curious about the ergonomics of these new bodies and how quickly Canon introduced native macro lenses for the RF.


----------



## Sharlin (Feb 2, 2020)

Trankilstef said:


> The question I ask myself is what is considered the more video centric camera between the R5 and R6 cameras? Looking at the specs it should be the R5 but mybe the video functions like the 8k or the 4k120 will have major crop



Well, the 8k definitely cannot have a major crop or it won't be 8k.


----------



## LensFungus (Feb 2, 2020)

Trankilstef said:


> The question I ask myself is what is considered the more video centric camera between the R5 and R6 cameras? Looking at the specs it should be the R5 but mybe the video functions like the 8k or the 4k120 will have major crop, and on the opposite the low megapixel and specs of the R6 make it a mini 1dX MkIII? I really don't know how to consider either of thes rumored cameras in the Canon lineup.


I guess you have to wait until the tests of the R6 in May/June/July for the final comparison. People cheered when Canon announced 4k for the 5D Mark IV but then it had this huge crop. Canon announced 4k for the Canon M50 but then it didn't have Dual Pixal AF in 4k. The Canon M6 Mark II has 1080p/120fps but it also has a crop, no AF and no sound in this mode.


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 2, 2020)

LensFungus said:


> I guess you have to wait until the tests of the R6 in May/June/July for the final comparison. People cheered when Canon announced 4k for the 5D Mark IV but then it had this huge crop. Canon announced 4k for the Canon M50 but then it didn't have Dual Pixal AF in 4k. The Canon M6 Mark II has 1080p/120fps but it also has a crop, no AF and no sound in this mode.


None of the cameras that shoot high speed video beyond 2x record audio natively. Not sure if its limitation of audio sampling rate or DSP or somewhere else but its a commom limitation.


----------



## DBounce (Feb 2, 2020)

*8K with a major crop is impossible... here’s why:*

To render a 8K image requires at least 33 megapixels. Ideally, you would want more for oversampling. With the sensor being only 45 megapixels how major of a crop could it possibly be? It is simply not possible to have a “major” crop and 8K at the same time. There are too few megapixels to allow for it.

Regarding 4K, the 8 megapixels needed to produce the image could certainly be accomplished with a significant crop from the 45mp sensor. So weather or not the 4K will be cropped it’s up in the air. However, if the new sensor/processor is truly 8K capable, perhaps it is also able to process 4K @ 120fps without a crop? No doubt Canon remembers how much negative press they got for having a “major crop” on the EOS R. I would not be surprised to learn that such a crop is absent from the new camera. Hopefully we will know soon.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 2, 2020)

I’m having a hard time believing the announcement and release dates. Announcing one camera in February but releasing it in July and then announcing a second camera in May and releasing it in June doesn’t make sense.


----------



## Sharlin (Feb 2, 2020)

DBounce said:


> To render a 8K image requires at least 33 megapixels. Ideally, you would want more for oversampling. With the sensor being only 45 megapixels how major of a crop could it possibly be? It is simply not possible to have a “major” crop and 8K at the same time. There are too few megapixels to allow for it.



Additionally, remember that the aspect ratios are different. A 45 MP 3:2 sensor has roughly 8200 horizontal pixels, so it's very much the minimum resolution that allows you to shoot "DCI 8K". On the other hand 16:9 8K footage will likely have a _very_ slight crop.


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 2, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I’m having a hard time believing the announcement and release dates. Announcing one camera in February but releasing it in July and then announcing a second camera in May and releasing it in June doesn’t make sense.



True!
That also ringed a bell on me! There is a lot of time from announcement of the R5 and the supposedly the market release date. It´s 5 months it´s a lot of time! Usually we have an announcement and after 1 month/1 and half camera hits the streets... For example, 1dxMKIII was announced at 6 January and will be on the market on 13 February. 1 and half month after. Unless.....we only going to have a Development announcement of the R5 now....But that would be trully awkward! 

From the R6 it will make more sense, announcing in May and releasing in June. We need to wait a bit longer to clarify this things...But it will be great disappointing if we have to wait until July for this R5....But heck....I am waiting for 3 years, what is the problem in waiting more 3/4 months!


----------



## bitcars (Feb 2, 2020)

DBounce said:


> *8K with a major crop is impossible... here’s why:*
> 
> To render a 8K image requires at least 33 megapixels. Ideally, you would want more for oversampling. With the sensor being only 45 megapixels how major of a crop could it possibly be? It is simply not possible to have a “major” crop and 8K at the same time. There are too few megapixels to allow for it.
> 
> Regarding 4K, the 8 megapixels needed to produce the image could certainly be accomplished with a significant crop from the 45mp sensor. So weather or not the 4K will be cropped it’s up in the air. However, if the new sensor/processor is truly 8K capable, perhaps it is also able to process 4K @ 120fps without a crop? No doubt Canon remembers how much negative press they got for having a “major crop” on the EOS R. I would not be surprised to learn that such a crop is absent from the new camera. Hopefully we will know soon.



I have a suspicion that Canon will keep the 8K30 and 4K120 modes under the same computational bandwidth. (4X pixels vs 4X fps) So with that logic 8K will not have much noticeable crop to achieve 7680 × 4320 on a 7726 x 5150 sensor, while 4K 120 will have a even larger crop than R's 4K.


----------



## Sharlin (Feb 2, 2020)

The 1DX3 had a "development announcement" before the launch announcement. Canon may be doing a similar thing with the R5, revealing some of the specs but not all of them. Historically that hasn't been how Canon operates but that could be changing. An "intensely competitive" environment and all that.


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 2, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> The 1DX3 had a "development announcement" before the launch announcement. Canon may be doing a similar thing with the R5, revealing some of the specs but not all of them. Historically that hasn't been how Canon operates but that could be changing. An "intensely competitive" environment and all that.


Yes. That´s the only explanation for the R5 dates. However there is one small (but big) difference. In the development announcement of Canon 1dxIII we didn´t have so much info! From these R5 it seems that we have practically all the info (at least the biggest and relevant....). So its kinda weird. We need to wait a bit longer to know.


----------



## addola (Feb 2, 2020)

That rumored date for the R5 annoncement is pretty near! Only 11 days way!


----------



## Adelino (Feb 2, 2020)

These are some of the more odd ball rumors in awhile, the dates the specs. But as others have said Canon is in a new more aggressive mode so the old ways are not the new ways we will know more soon!


----------



## Roy Hunte (Feb 2, 2020)

bitcars said:


> I have a suspicion that Canon will keep the 8K30 and 4K120 modes under the same computational bandwidth. (4X pixels vs 4X fps) So with that logic 8K will not have much noticeable crop to achieve 7680 × 4320 on a 7726 x 5150 sensor, while 4K 120 will have a even larger crop than R's 4K.


So you're saying most people will shoot in 8k and not 4k....


----------



## Sharlin (Feb 2, 2020)

Roy Hunte said:


> So you're saying most people will shoot in 8k and not 4k....



Most people will probably shoot at 4K60 or 4K30. 4K120 is for special situations where a 2x crop might not even be that big a deal. It's not like 8K30 is a replacement for 4K120, they're completely different beasts.


----------



## Jones (Feb 2, 2020)

Apart from the R5, the 850D (T8i) sounds very interesting, too!

What immediately attracted my attention was the 24MP sensor. I can't imagine that Canon will reuse a multiple-year-old 24MP sensor for a 850D when they've already got a new generation of sensors on the market (32MP 90D).

Historically, the xxD and the xxxD had the same sensor or a very similar sensor in regards of pixel density. So why should Canon now put a sensor with considerably lower pixel density in the 90Ds' little brother?

The answer could be that this 24MP sensor has been produced using the same material, production process and basic design as the 90D sensor. Consequently, due to the 24MP's larger pixels, this should result in noticably lower noise compared to the 90D sensor!

Sounds almost too good to be true for a Rebel Class camera but we will know soon...


----------



## Joules (Feb 2, 2020)

Jones said:


> What immediately attracted my attention was the 24MP sensor. I can't imagine that Canon will reuse a multiple-year-old 24MP sensor for a 850D when they've already got a new generation of sensors on the market (32MP 90D).


Because we never saw Canon reuse an APS-C sensor before  Cough 18 MP cough


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 2, 2020)

Jones said:


> Historically, the xxD and the xxxD had the same sensor or a very similar sensor in regards of pixel density. So why should Canon now put a sensor with considerably lower pixel density in the 90Ds' little brother?
> 
> The answer could be that this 24MP sensor has been produced using the same material, production process and basic design as the 90D sensor. Consequently, due to the 24MP's larger pixels, this should result in noticably lower noise compared to the 90D sensor!



Canon thinks EF is on the way out. Canon is known for reusing parts to save money. In this situation, it would make sense to have both cameras use the exact same sensor so they could keep one manufacturing line going, one spare parts stock, etc.


----------



## Mark3794 (Feb 2, 2020)

Jones said:


> Apart from the R5, the 850D (T8i) sounds very interesting, too!
> 
> What immediately attracted my attention was the 24MP sensor. I can't imagine that Canon will reuse a multiple-year-old 24MP sensor for a 850D when they've already got a new generation of sensors on the market (32MP 90D).
> 
> ...


Since Nokishita reports 4k with no crop there is the possibility that it is the old 80d sensor but with a new logic circuitry that enables faster redout, i think they already did this with the 1dx mark iii sensor


----------



## Tom W (Feb 2, 2020)

Well, put me down for a strong maybe in the R5 as well as the 100-500 and 1.4X teleconverter. If it comes to fruition.


----------



## jvillain (Feb 2, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> Well, the 8k definitely cannot have a major crop or it won't be 8k.



Unless it's 8K is like the EOS-R 4K. Upconverted from a crop that is much lower than 4K. Canon has no issues with lying.


----------



## sdz (Feb 2, 2020)

It seems Canon abandoned the high MP camera promised for 2020. This might be a a market focused decision: Canon expects to sell more R5s than R5S'. 

Critics do not trust these rumors, believing Canon could not make such a long leap in performance. It is clear that we need to wait, first, for the official announcement and, second, for the camera to hit the streets before we can evaluate what Canon has achieved. But if Canon will introduce new sensor tech with the 5R, then past track records have less predictive power than the critics believe. Time will tell.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 2, 2020)

jvillain said:


> Unless it's 8K is like the EOS-R 4K. Upconverted from a crop that is much lower than 4K. Canon has no issues with lying.


When did Canon lie? Interesting. Since I sink so much money into their products I'd really like to know, specifically, when *Canon* lied... or if maybe you didn't understand the specs when you purchased. Or maybe you took a rumor as an official Canon press release? Especially when lying about a product would be a terrible drag on sales after the truth comes out. It is in Canon's best interest to tell the truth, not lie.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 2, 2020)

Now what we have to debate is the rumour of the roundup of the rumours. I want substance.  Give me substance!

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Feb 2, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Now what we have to debate is the rumour of the roundup of the rumours. I want substance.  Give me substance!
> 
> Jack


Substance abuse?


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 2, 2020)

Jones said:


> Apart from the R5, the 850D (T8i) sounds very interesting, too!
> 
> I can't imagine that Canon will reuse a multiple-year-old 24MP sensor for a 850D when they've already got a new generation of sensors on the market (32MP 90D).




Why wouldn't they? Rebels had a recycled 18 MP sensor for numerous refreshes, didn't they?

And what great sensor breakthrough are you counting on? The Rebel already went to on-chip ADC and got its base ISO bump with the 800D. So one would think that they are done with bigger 'gain a stop of DR' sort of upgrades in this product line.

- A


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 2, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Substance abuse?


Yes, at this point I'm addicted. I want the potent stuff.

Jack


----------



## BurningPlatform (Feb 2, 2020)

jvillain said:


> Unless it's 8K is like the EOS-R 4K. Upconverted from a crop that is much lower than 4K. Canon has no issues with lying.


I think you are wrong. Canon EOS R full image: 6720x4480, diagonal is 8076 "px"; Canon EOS R 4k: 3840x2160; diagonal 4406 "px". Crop=4406:8076 = 1:1.83, as claimed, no up-sampling needed. You must be referring to the disappointment that Canon did not give us 4096 x2160 DCI 4k, only this UHD kind of 4k. /Edit: Fixed: diagonals were swapped/


----------



## usern4cr (Feb 2, 2020)

I hope Canon might consider giving their camera bodies (R5 etc) a Arca-Swiss quick-release set of grooves on the bottom front & back edges? It wouldn't take any appreciable room or add any weight, and then the body could be popped on a tripod or gimbal via industry-standard quick-release! I paid good money to add a ReallyRightStuff arca-swiss compatible adaptor to my EM1m2 bottom (which extends the entire body down by 1/2" ). I'll add the same when I get the R5 as I'll need it, but if Canon added the 2 grooves (basically for free) then we'd all get this ability out of the box and with no extension to the bottom! And their marketing gets one more brilliant new feature to advertise!


----------



## mistaspeedy (Feb 2, 2020)

There are still a few missing pieces of information I would like to know in time:
Will we get 10 bit, 4:2:2 internal recording for the video?

Canon just might convince me to upgrade from my EOS R... since I am considering the following two things (during the 6-12 months) as an added extra to my EOS R:
Atomos Ninja V external recorder (to get 10-bit 4:2:2)
Speed booster EF to RF adapter (to reduce that crop)

The new R5 could make these two things obsolete (or at least less necessary)


----------



## Viggo (Feb 2, 2020)

I haven’t REALLY paid attention to the R5 and R6 yet. But, I read that the R6 might be a successor of the 6d? Is that the case when it might have 12/20 fps? Seems weird ...


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 2, 2020)

mistaspeedy said:


> There are still a few missing pieces of information I would like to know in time:




There's a spectactular number of unknowns right now. As a stills shooter, I'd like to know:

Price, of course
Is there some new sensor tech/architecture in there?
What bells and whistles no longer work at 12 fps mechanical or 20 fps e-shutter? Is compressed RAW required to hit these burst speeds?
Button layout, dials, ergonomics, size of grip, etc.
Is there a tilty-flippy?
- A


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 2, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> There's a spectactular number of unknowns right now. As a stills shooter, I'd like to know:
> 
> Price, of course
> Is there some new sensor tech/architecture in there?
> ...


Add: EVF refresh rate and density


----------



## Dragon (Feb 2, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> None of the cameras that shoot high speed video beyond 2x record audio natively. Not sure if its limitation of audio sampling rate or DSP or somewhere else but its a commom limitation.


Most likely because it would sound really weird played back at 1/2 or 1/4 speed .


----------



## DBounce (Feb 2, 2020)

I’m curious about dynamic range, Codecs, battery life. I would love a larger rear display.


----------



## Stig Nygaard (Feb 2, 2020)

addola said:


> That rumored date for the R5 annoncement is pretty near! Only 11 days way!



Sure, so the rumour says. But it also says shipping in July. And it is the second part that is regarded the most trustworthy by CR...


----------



## dog8food (Feb 2, 2020)

if the metabones speedbooster for the R can still be adapted to this new R5 to use my EF lenses for video, then oh my.....


----------



## NorskHest (Feb 2, 2020)

Roy Hunte said:


> So you're saying most people will shoot in 8k and not 4k....


I think that’s what he is saying. Especially if you can pull frame grabs. It will turn you all into pro photographers.


----------



## Jethro (Feb 2, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> I think that’s what he is saying. Especially if you can pull frame grabs. It will turn you all into pro photographers.


Well, it would let us choose between an immense number of amateur frames.


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Feb 2, 2020)

I shoot portraits, weddings and big redwoods like the forest below. A new R5 would be a nice 3rd body to put alongside my 5DS and EOS R ..... Cheers, MDV / www.mdvaden.com/redwoods.shtml


.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 2, 2020)

Viggo said:


> I haven’t REALLY paid attention to the R5 and R6 yet. But, I read that the R6 might be a successor of the 6d? Is that the case when it might have 12/20 fps? Seems weird ...



I'm gonna keep banging this drum until we know more, but don't be fooled by the "R6" designation yet. We don't know it has anything to do with the 6D line of cameras.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 2, 2020)

Jones said:


> The answer could be that this 24MP sensor has been produced using the same material, production process and basic design as the 90D sensor. Consequently, due to the 24MP's larger pixels, this should result in noticably lower noise compared to the 90D sensor!



High ISO noise is dominated by sensor size, not pixel size. It has been that way for years...probably all the way back to the introduction of gapless microlenses...with only small differences between sensors within a format. The 90D sensor isn't doing anything revolutionary to maintain high ISO noise despite the MP increase, and the T8i will be comparable whether or not it uses a newer sensor.

The T8i is still quite a camera for a Rebel.


----------



## dtaylor (Feb 2, 2020)

sdz said:


> It seems Canon abandoned the high MP camera promised for 2020. This might be a a market focused decision: Canon expects to sell more R5s than R5S'.



I hope when they do introduce a high MP R body that they call it an R3, and not an R5s. Especially if they preserve the choice of AA/no AA filter, which would create an R5sR. Do we really need a designation that sounds like a droid from Star Wars?

And if they do go with R3 I wouldn't mind them re-introducing the eye AF from the EOS 3.


----------



## Sharlin (Feb 2, 2020)

jvillain said:


> Unless it's 8K is like the EOS-R 4K. Upconverted from a crop that is much lower than 4K. Canon has no issues with lying.



What are you smoking? The R 4K is a 3840x2160 center crop, like the 5D4.


----------



## BillB (Feb 2, 2020)

Adelino said:


> These are some of the more odd ball rumors in awhile, the dates the specs. But as others have said Canon is in a new more aggressive mode so the old ways are not the new ways we will know more soon!


With the R6 coming in June and the R5 coming in July, after a February announcement of the R5, people may tend toput off buying a camera until the summer. Maybe Canon figures that most people will need time to talk themselves into buying one of these cameras. It does not look like either one is going to be cheap. Or maybe Canon just lost control of the information release on the R5 and moved the R5 announcement forward to try to get back in control.


----------



## BillB (Feb 2, 2020)

sdz said:


> It seems Canon abandoned the high MP camera promised for 2020. This might be a a market focused decision: Canon expects to sell more R5s than R5S'.


I don't think that Canon ever promised a high MP camera for 2020. Some people thought there would be a high res FF camera after the release of the 90D and the M6II with their 32 mp aps-c sensors, but that was internet speculation. I don't know of any Canon promise. You are likely right that Canon expects to sell more R5s than high res cameras, but my guess is that Canon's plan for quite a while has been to release the R5 before the high res camera.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 2, 2020)

BillB said:


> With the R6 coming in June and the R5 coming in July, after a February announcement of the R5, people may tend toput off buying a camera until the summer. Maybe Canon figures that most people will need time to talk themselves into buying one of these cameras. It does not look like either one is going to be cheap. Or maybe Canon just lost control of the information release on the R5 and moved the R5 announcement forward to try to get back in control.


Fervent anticipation is a great marketing tool.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 2, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> I think that’s what he is saying. Especially if you can pull frame grabs. It will turn you all into pro photographers.


People don't understand frame grabs. You still have to shoot at a shutter speed appropriate for stopping action, which is not the same shutter speed as you would use for video. Shooting at 1/60 sec (normal video) or even at 1/250 sec (for slo-mo) is only going to get you thousands of blurred images. You can shoot at 1/1000 second, but then the video will look like crap. The key to smooth video is to blur the action from one frame to the next, hardly conducive to frame grabs.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 2, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Yes. That´s the only explanation for the R5 dates. However there is one small (but big) difference. In the development announcement of Canon 1dxIII we didn´t have so much info! From these R5 it seems that we have practically all the info (at least the biggest and relevant....). So its kinda weird. We need to wait a bit longer to know.


I wonder if Canon decided to make a development announcement for the R5, in order to head off the complaints about a 20mp sensor when they announce the R6. 

"This is the camera we are going to release but you have to wait until summer. In the meantime, watch for another announcement in May."


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 2, 2020)

unfocused said:


> People don't understand frame grabs. You still have to shoot at a shutter speed appropriate for stopping action, which is not the same shutter speed as you would use for video. Shooting at 1/60 sec (normal video) or even at 1/250 sec (for slo-mo) is only going to get you thousands of blurred images. You can shoot at 1/1000 second, but then the video will look like crap. The key to smooth video is to blur the action from one frame to the next, hardly conducive to frame grabs.


I'm guessing that those wanting frame grabs are doing "fast stills" not actual video as such. Never the less, fast shutter video doesn't look quite as bad as your statement implies. 

I used this process in shooting a Quetzal @ 400mm X2 coming/going from a nest @ 4k60 FPS (and alternately 30 FPS) and the results would have been good except for two issues. The AF couldn't snap on the bird fast enough and pre-focusing was challenging due to the trajectory of the bird. However, the biggest frustration was the cloud forest high ISO/ shutter speed compromise. I had a plan to do better but it couldn't work out to get back to the site, much to my consternation. Actual real-time video of this is less than a blink, so pointless. The slo-mo of 60FPS is not bad though.

I couldn't keep the video going continuously so it was tricky shooting and deleting and killing batteries over a couple hours - very tiring. Now if there had been chicks the visits would have been more predictable.

Jack


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Feb 2, 2020)

jvillain said:


> Unless it's 8K is like the EOS-R 4K. Upconverted from a crop that is much lower than 4K. Canon has no issues with lying.



Indeed, look at the M6II, the 4K is more like 3K upsampled to 4K. The 8K will be in-camera timelapse for sure and the 4K120p if true will at best be 2x crop limited to a few minutes capture time. The heat issues alone will be immense. The vide specs sound improbable, they would be shooting their Cine line in the head, as do the shooting speeds, at best they will be for static objects and tracking performance will halve these values: 7fps and 10fps.


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 2, 2020)

Could someone who does video explain why a user would want 8K video.
What would they use it for and who would view it at 8K?
Since I can barely visually detect the improvement of 4K over HD, is it easy to see the difference between 4K and 8K?
Seeing as most video seems to be consumed on phones would you notice 8k over HD on a phone?
Does anyone commercially ask for 8K over 4K or HD? Is it common?
I'm surprised its such a big selling point, is it something that users desire but won't really use?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 2, 2020)

Hector1970 said:


> Could someone who does video explain why a user would want 8K video.
> What would they use it for and who would view it at 8K?
> Since I can barely visually detect the improvement of 4K over HD, is it easy to see the difference between 4K and 8K?
> Seeing as most video seems to be consumed on phones would you notice 8k over HD on a phone?
> ...


I'm far from an expert but one great advantage is you can pan and zoom in post and still end up with HD.

Jack


----------



## David - Sydney (Feb 2, 2020)

One possibility for the delay of the high res R is that there was a problem on the sensor during fabrication meaning that they needed to make a change for full production. Could easily account for a few months' delay.


----------



## 20Dave (Feb 2, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I’m having a hard time believing the announcement and release dates. Announcing one camera in February but releasing it in July and then announcing a second camera in May and releasing it in June doesn’t make sense.


If Canon was worried that it would impact sales of their existing product line while people wait for the new cameras, then I agree. But it's possible that they are counting on it impacting sales of their competitors' product lines while people wait. It can stop a loss of market share during the interim period.


----------



## peters (Feb 2, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> The R6 interests me a lot for weddings.


Why not the R5? Its higher Resolution offers way more options to crop in later. 
Or do you expect a better Noise performance from the R6 since it got a lower resolution?


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> People don't understand frame grabs. You still have to shoot at a shutter speed appropriate for stopping action, which is not the same shutter speed as you would use for video. Shooting at 1/60 sec (normal video) or even at 1/250 sec (for slo-mo) is only going to get you thousands of blurred images. You can shoot at 1/1000 second, but then the video will look like crap. The key to smooth video is to blur the action from one frame to the next, hardly conducive to frame grabs.



If it is a scene without too much of an action, you can, i could pull some good shots from the 1Dx mkII. But usually yes, you are correct. Video features are different from stills, and you must use slow shutters. That´s one of the reasons Canon 1D C didn´t have the desirable sucess...

That´s also the reason Canon made a brilliant change in the 1dx mkIII witch allows that the camera memorize 2 different settings. In video mode you have 1 setting, and in Photo mode you have another. For example you have the shutter 1/1000 for photo and when you change to video automatically change also the shutter for your desire speed (1/50 most common). I lost the count of times I ended up with blurry images because i maintain shutter in 1/50 after recording video and crapy video footage recorded at 1/1600!!  With this new feature, this wont happen no more!! Thumbs up Canon!!! I hope this will also come in the R5!


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 3, 2020)

BurningPlatform said:


> 6720x4480, diagonal is 4406 "px"; Canon EOS R 4k: 3840x2160; diagonal 8076 "px".


Looks like diagonals are swapped.


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 3, 2020)

Hector1970 said:


> Could someone who does video explain why a user would want 8K video.
> What would they use it for and who would view it at 8K?
> Since I can barely visually detect the improvement of 4K over HD, is it easy to see the difference between 4K and 8K?
> Seeing as most video seems to be consumed on phones would you notice 8k over HD on a phone?
> ...



8K? No, not much of users want! And the reason of recording in 8k would be obvious, you get a lot more space to zoom in without loosing quality (same as crop in stills). Think like photography, why you want more MP if you are a birder? To be able to crop and compose without lose quality. The more MP the more you can crop. In video is the same. Most of the times we can make a zoom with prime lenses witch is great. So, that´s one reaason that even the project you are filming is 1080p you still wanna record in 4k or higher to get more space to zoom or crop. 

The other reason is overall image quality, you may not see a difference but there is a difference between 4k and 1080p footage. Also, of course,if you see it in a 4k tv then that difference will become more obvious. These days I always record 4k, because of better quality and zoom, but also because 4k tvs are getting in people´s homes. 2020 will put a lot more 4k tv´s out there. And usually nowadays agencies and productions ask for 4k footage. You wanna be prepared for the future that is ahead. 

So this are the reasons! If I will record in 8k? Most probably not. But it´s fun to have! In my personal use, i care only with [email protected] and [email protected] Ohhh and it would be fantastic if Canon also put 4k Timelapse video recording (or 8k  )


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Feb 3, 2020)

Canon has been behind tech wise with their bodies and has been trying to stop defections 
The R was rushed.
These new cameras are being leaked to keep canon customers on the fence within the fold
hopefully they deliver this year



unfocused said:


> I wonder if Canon decided to make a development announcement for the R5, in order to head off the complaints about a 20mp sensor when they announce the R6.
> 
> "This is the camera we are going to release but you have to wait until summer. In the meantime, watch for another announcement in May."


----------



## MrGuyWithACamera (Feb 3, 2020)

Still waiting to see that 5DV...


----------



## Inspired (Feb 3, 2020)

AaronT said:


> I have a 5DsR and would like more megapixels than have more fps. I'm not interested in the video at all. Another stop of DR would be nice, but, I still manage to get good photos without it. That's just me.


I prefer dynamic range also


----------



## Inspired (Feb 3, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> Really curious about the ergonomics of these new bodies and how quickly Canon introduced native macro lenses for the RF.


Don't forget you still have all the EF glass


----------



## richperson (Feb 3, 2020)

peters said:


> Why not the R5? Its higher Resolution offers way more options to crop in later.
> Or do you expect a better Noise performance from the R6 since it got a lower resolution?



I'm guessing the hope is that the R6 might have a sensor like the 1Diii, which might sacrifice MP for high ISO noise. If that is the case, I also might be more interested in the R6 than the R5 also.


----------



## Jethro (Feb 3, 2020)

Inspired said:


> Don't forget you still have all the EF glass


Yes and the macros will all work fine, but a 100mm prime / macro is a really standard lens, and it 'must' come in the RF mount sooner rather than later. I'm very conflicted about whether to wait for a Canon RF version rather than buying an EF to adapt.


----------



## Adelino (Feb 3, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Fervent anticipation is a great marketing tool.


Don't forget the Osborne effect though.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 3, 2020)

Adelino said:


> Don't forget the Osborne effect though.


I wasn't familiar with this term, but yes, this is along the lines of what I was thinking. Make a development announcement about the R5, but selectively leak that a second camera is coming first, the R6. Some people will wait for the R5, but others may go for the R6, which apparently will be available sooner. Customers can compare the actual specs of the R6 once it is announced, to the presumed specs of the coming R5 and decide which they'd rather have. Especially since the R5 is supposed to be released a month after the R6. 

This is less risky than doing it the other way around: Announce the R6 and then "surprise!" spring the R5 on people a month later. Although Canon is notorious for being opaque about their plans, in this case they probably saw benefits to being at least a little more transparent in order to provide some relief valves for the pent up demand for mirrorless among some customers.

I was sincerely hoping (fantasizing) that the R6 would be an action oriented mirrorless, but I suspect that it will instead be a lower cost model, slotted in somewhere between the R and the R5.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 3, 2020)

Drcampbellicu said:


> Canon has been behind tech wise with their bodies and has been trying to stop defections
> The R was rushed.
> These new cameras are being leaked to keep canon customers on the fence within the fold
> hopefully they deliver this year



I disagree with these statements. There really isn't anything to substantiate that Canon "has been behind tech wise." There are differences between manufacturers, but Canon is not "behind" in any significant way. 

People keep saying the R was rushed or somehow incomplete. But, that assessment usually comes from people who don't use the camera. 

In order to keep Canon customers within the fold, there would have to be some indication that customers are "on the fence." Looking at the sales figures that are available, it doesn't appear that Canon has been having any problem with customers moving to another brand. 

Canon has acknowledged that their entrance into the mirrorless market was late, but a late entrance does not equate with an inferior entrance. Canon has some catching up to do to solidify its market share, but that will be accomplished with a broader range of products and aggressive marketing.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I disagree with these statements. There really isn't anything to substantiate that Canon "has been behind tech wise." There are differences between manufacturers, but Canon is not "behind" in any significant way.
> 
> People keep saying the R was rushed or somehow incomplete. But, that assessment usually comes from people who don't use the camera.
> 
> ...



If "behind" means "does not have a new sensor when compared to previous model/equivalent model," then yes, the R is behind because Canon reused the 5DIV sensor. However, by the same metric, the a9II is also behind, since it uses the a9 sensor.

I think "behind" can also mean "lacking when compared to the competition." The R's eye autofocus is good, but it's not as good as Sony's, according to most everyone. Does that make it "behind?" Kinda, yeah, even if it's decent. And I can't be the only one who wants to see Canon really push the envelope with its camera tech.

On that note, in terms of specs and also functionality, the R and RP do feel a little under-baked to me, but that of course doesn't make them poor cameras. My RP froze twice last night when I hit the top function button and spun the function wheel, and while I haven't been able to reproduce the glitch, it doesn't inspire confidence in me, especially ahead of my upcoming event work (yes, I have firmware 1.4.0).

I do expect future R cameras to both _feel_ robust and reliable and _also_ have cutting edge specs. Naturally, I expect to pay $3,500-4,500 to get one of them


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I disagree with these statements. There really isn't anything to substantiate that Canon "has been behind tech wise." There are differences between manufacturers, but Canon is not "behind" in any significant way.
> 
> People keep saying the R was rushed or somehow incomplete. But, that assessment usually comes from people who don't use the camera.
> 
> ...


I agree with you. Strange thing is this: I own an R and it doesn't feel rushed to me at all. It's a great camera for portraiture which is what, I think, the initial lenses were more aimed at, to include the 28-70. People say it was rushed, but I have to disagree with them. For my uses, it is a great camera and a very worthy upgrade from the 5D Mark III. I am thrilled with it. I'm also thrilled with the glass. So in my case, Canon did a great job. Was it rushed in the firmware sense? Maybe. People tend to love it or hate it. I am much happier with it than I would have been with a 5D Mark IV. The R5 will be a great camera, but far more camera than I need.


----------



## beachcolonist (Feb 3, 2020)

Trankilstef said:


> The question I ask myself is what is considered the more video centric camera between the R5 and R6 cameras? Looking at the specs it should be the R5 but mybe the video functions like the 8k or the 4k120 will have major crop, and on the opposite the low megapixel and specs of the R6 make it a mini 1dX MkIII? I really don't know how to consider either of thes rumored cameras in the Canon lineup.


Consider them hype.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 3, 2020)

MrGuyWithACamera said:


> Still waiting to see that 5DV...



Tbh not interested in 5DV at all, I shoot action/concerts but it's going to be less and less, and I shoot landscapes more and more. Don't need OVF for landscapes, IBIS is good to have but not a must for me.
More megapixels, flip/tilt screen, dynamic range and good low light performance for astro is what I'm waiting for. Canon should really hurry up as right now I have a budget for it and an acute GAS. Been waiting for a good mirrorless since 2018 and it's been too long.


----------



## Diltiazem (Feb 3, 2020)

navastronia said:


> I'm gonna keep banging this drum until we know more, but don't be fooled by the "R6" designation yet. We don't know it has anything to do with the 6D line of cameras.


I think R5 is 5D equivalent.
R6 is 6D equivalent.
RP = FF rebel
R = first attempt at FF mirrorless and probably won't have a successor 

Competition for market share is more intense than before and Canon is new to the FF mirrorless market and needs to get as many users as possible to the new mount. So, the difference between R5 and R6 probably won't be similar to the difference between 5DIV and 6D II. Both R5 and R6 will have to have very capable AF and video capabilities, so I suspect differences in these aspects will be minimal. The main differences will be in the sensor resolution, number of card slots and weather sealing. 
Btw, it is highly likely that R6 will have the same sensor as 1DX III and R5 will have the new generation sensor.


----------



## Joules (Feb 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> People keep saying the R was rushed or somehow incomplete. But, that assessment usually comes from people who don't use the camera.


The R did not introduce any new technology, apart from the RF mount of course. And that does not make it rushed, or bad or keep it from being the awesome camera it is.

But it does really look like they made an effort to create a well rounded entry to the mirrorless market to match Nikon while simultaneously working on a number of new technologies that are aimed towards mirrorless, but are only ready now:

- IBIS
- Probably EVF variations
- Huge Throughput
- Highly efficient processor architecture
- Simpler but fast FF shutters
- Supposedly higher DR / lower noise sensor, but I think Canon is just talking about their JPEG / HEIF files there

The M6 II, 90D and 1DX III have all shown that Canon has made a pretty big leap in technology from the last generation, to say the least. IBIS may not be at the price point yet, where they can put it in the M6 II, and in a DSLR it could lead to other issues.

But it looks like they have a bunch of really exciting tech ready and will combine it in the R5, to deliver a camera that is actually ahead of the competition in numerous objective points. And that's on top of the subjective camera aspects where Canon has been the preferred choice for most folks despite the mild improvements we saw over the last years.


----------



## SteveC (Feb 3, 2020)

Time for me to weigh in:

The R5 might be the full-frame I've been waiting for, to enter the full-frame world.

Of course, that's going to depend on its price!


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 3, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> I think that’s what he is saying. Especially if you can pull frame grabs. It will turn you all into pro photographers.



Pro photographers use flash, not video frame grabs.


----------



## BurningPlatform (Feb 3, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Looks like diagonals are swapped.


Yes. sorry about that, and thanks. Good to see someone actually reads what others post.


----------



## PhotoSiem (Feb 3, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Pro photographers use flash, not video frame grabs.



Not entirely, there is a shift to video and photo combination, which also leads to continues lightning, which let photographers use continues lightning, also for Pro's. There would a frame grab more relevant and sufficient. 

And wait, what are pro's? In my opinion Pro's are people that make content and images that works.There is no specific way to create such work.


----------



## freejay (Feb 3, 2020)

Joules said:


> The R did not introduce any new technology, apart from the RF mount of course. And that does not make it rushed, or bad or keep it from being the awesome camera it is.
> 
> But it does really look like they made an effort to create a well rounded entry to the mirrorless market to match Nikon while simultaneously working on a number of new technologies that are aimed towards mirrorless, but are only ready now:
> 
> ...


I absolutely agree!


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 3, 2020)

Inspired said:


> Don't forget you still have all the EF glass


There are no good 180mm Macros left for EF system with discontinuation of Sigma 180mm OS. There are already compatibility issues with Sigma 180mm on EOS-R and with release of these new cameras the problem will just get worse and no option to upgrade firmware as its older pre Global Vision lens. Rest all macro lenses I own work just fine with EOS R as most of them are Manual focus macro with 100mm L being the only AF macro in my kit.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 3, 2020)

Drcampbellicu said:


> Canon has been behind tech wise with their bodies and has been trying to stop defections
> The R was rushed.
> These new cameras are being leaked to keep canon customers on the fence within the fold
> hopefully they deliver this year



I disagree.

The RF mount was a natural progression as was the 1.0 camera bodies.

None of them could have been done until Canon updated their fab to produce DPAF full frame sensors, once it was done, and the decision was made to use the RF mount (most likely because of IBIS + IS) then releasing the cameras made a lot of sense. To do it later, would have been progressively harder because Canon would have most likely released the 1DX Mark III, the 5D Mark V,etc camera bodies which would have made it even more difficult for EF users to transition over to the RF mount.

As it is the 5D Mark IV is difficult enough for people to decide to move to the EOS R system, perhaps with the R5 Canon will have a compelling body. For this reason alone, Canon should have done the RF mount sooner. Nothing to do with Sony,etc.

But to say Canon panicked? How can they when it takes around 3+ years to develop a camera?

Canon also doesn't leak.

If Canon wanted the world to know - they'd do a development announcement.


----------



## reef58 (Feb 3, 2020)

navastronia said:


> If "behind" means "does not have a new sensor when compared to previous model/equivalent model," then yes, the R is behind because Canon reused the 5DIV sensor. However, by the same metric, the a9II is also behind, since it uses the a9 sensor.
> 
> I think "behind" can also mean "lacking when compared to the competition." The R's eye autofocus is good, but it's not as good as Sony's, according to most everyone. Does that make it "behind?" Kinda, yeah, even if it's decent. And I can't be the only one who wants to see Canon really push the envelope with its camera tech.
> 
> ...



I did not know the camera benchmark is eye auto focus.


----------



## Mike9129 (Feb 3, 2020)

Personally hoping this thing has dual CFexpress card slots


----------



## Hector1970 (Feb 3, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> 8K? No, not much of users want! And the reason of recording in 8k would be obvious, you get a lot more space to zoom in without loosing quality (same as crop in stills). Think like photography, why you want more MP if you are a birder? To be able to crop and compose without lose quality. The more MP the more you can crop. In video is the same. Most of the times we can make a zoom with prime lenses witch is great. So, that´s one reaason that even the project you are filming is 1080p you still wanna record in 4k or higher to get more space to zoom or crop.
> 
> The other reason is overall image quality, you may not see a difference but there is a difference between 4k and 1080p footage. Also, of course,if you see it in a 4k tv then that difference will become more obvious. These days I always record 4k, because of better quality and zoom, but also because 4k tvs are getting in people´s homes. 2020 will put a lot more 4k tv´s out there. And usually nowadays agencies and productions ask for 4k footage. You wanna be prepared for the future that is ahead.
> 
> So this are the reasons! If I will record in 8k? Most probably not. But it´s fun to have! In my personal use, i care only with [email protected] and [email protected] Ohhh and it would be fantastic if Canon also put 4k Timelapse video recording (or 8k  )


Thanks for the reply. 8K doesn’t seem very compelling but I can see the crop argument.


----------



## NorskHest (Feb 3, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Pro photographers use flash, not video frame grabs.


Do they? Are you sure? Sounds like fake news


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 3, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> There are no good 180mm Macros left for EF system with discontinuation of Sigma 180mm OS.



The Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L is that bad?


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 3, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> There are no good 180mm Macros left for EF system with discontinuation of Sigma 180mm OS. There are already compatibility issues with Sigma 180mm on EOS-R and with release of these new cameras the problem will just get worse and no option to upgrade firmware as its older pre Global Vision lens. Rest all macro lenses I own work just fine with EOS R as most of them are Manual focus macro with 100mm L being the only AF macro in my kit.




Is the 180L too old/slow/soft for you? It's still in production.









Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM Lens


Buy Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM Lens featuring EF-Mount Lens/Full-Frame Format, Aperture Range: f/3.5 to f/32, Three Ultra-Low Dispersion Elements, Super Spectra Coating, 1:1 Magnification, 1.6' Min. Focus, Ring-Type Ultrasonic Motor AF System, Internal Floating Focusing System...




www.bhphotovideo.com





- A


----------



## fabao (Feb 3, 2020)

I don't care what the rumor is anymore. I just completed my trinity!


----------



## IWLP (Feb 3, 2020)

I just watched a Super Bowl delivered in 720p. Sorry if I have a hard time getting excited about 4K, much less 8K. 

Better ergonomics (touch bar ... why?) would make the next line of R bodies much more usable for me.


----------



## peters (Feb 3, 2020)

Jethro said:


> Yes and the macros will all work fine, but a 100mm prime / macro is a really standard lens, and it 'must' come in the RF mount sooner rather than later. I'm very conflicted about whether to wait for a Canon RF version rather than buying an EF to adapt.


I personaly would not wait: you dont now when this lense is going to come exactly. May be still 2 years. And if you buy the EF lense used, you can easily resell it for the same price in a year  
Also the adapter works like a charm, its exactly the same as working with native lenses =)


----------



## amorse (Feb 3, 2020)

February 13th can't come soon enough.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 3, 2020)

IWLP said:


> I just watched a Super Bowl delivered in 720p. Sorry if I have a hard time getting excited about 4K, much less 8K.
> 
> Better ergonomics (touch bar ... why?) would make the next line of R bodies much more usable for me.


The touch bar is great for on/off purposes like the level and histogram. I use "swipe" for magnification.


----------



## mjg79 (Feb 3, 2020)

In a quite geeky way I am really excited about the teleconverters.

Just look at Son'y FE teleconverters. They are absolutely exceptional - tiny and ultra high performance. On fredmiranda there was a lot of detailed testing of the 100-400GM with the 1.4 and in nearly every shot it wasn't possible to even tell there was a teleconverter there. It seems getting them close to the sensor really makes a big difference.

The old Sony alpha teleconverters were nothing special really. By contrast Canon has a long history of being at the cutting edge with teleconverters so I really can't wait to see what they can offer for RF teleconverters.


----------



## mjg79 (Feb 3, 2020)

fabao said:


> I don't care what the rumor is anymore. I just completed my trinity!
> View attachment 188526



That's a lovely set up!

I am still using my EF 24-70 2.8L II adapted on the R. I have been tempted by the RF 24-70L IS mainly for the IS as I don't believe there is much optical improvement over the EF... but I think what really is stopping me buying it is the feeling that deep down I want the 28-70/2! Especially at the moment - the Rf 24-70 prices have dropped a bit but they are still obviously high thanks to its recent introduction while the 28-70 has settled a bit and at least in England currently isn't a crazy amount more than the 24-70.

How have you found having the 28-70 paired up with those two? I was expecting it to look much bigger than the 15-35! Can you enjoy walking around with it?


----------



## tron (Feb 3, 2020)

fabao said:


> I don't care what the rumor is anymore. I just completed my trinity!
> View attachment 188526


I am sorry to disappoint you: You have a trinity but NOT THE trinity. You miss 24-70 2.8L IS  
One important lens without IS and not 2.8  (OK double joking about the last part!)

By the way my IS trinity is: 15-35 2.8L IS 24-70 2.8L IS EF70-200 2.8L IS II + EF_RF adaptor  

Oh no wait! No trinity for me either


----------



## Architect1776 (Feb 3, 2020)

mjg79 said:


> In a quite geeky way I am really excited about the teleconverters.
> 
> Just look at Son'y FE teleconverters. They are absolutely exceptional - tiny and ultra high performance. On fredmiranda there was a lot of detailed testing of the 100-400GM with the 1.4 and in nearly every shot it wasn't possible to even tell there was a teleconverter there. It seems getting them close to the sensor really makes a big difference.
> 
> The old Sony alpha teleconverters were nothing special really. By contrast Canon has a long history of being at the cutting edge with teleconverters so I really can't wait to see what they can offer for RF teleconverters.



So Sony has almost caught up with Canon with TCs.
The 100-400mm L MII and both 1.4X and 2X MIII ihas been for years virtually no difference if the converter is on or off.
So yes, with the RF mount, Canon should take another major leap ahead optics wise.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 3, 2020)

mjg79 said:


> How have you found having the 28-70 paired up with those two? I was expecting it to look much bigger than the 15-35! Can you enjoy walking around with it?


Be warned: The 28-70 is a heavy beast. A very large heavy beast.

That said, it is a cracking great lens! Really, if you don't mind the size and weight, it is wonderful.


----------



## Nelu (Feb 3, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> The touch bar is great for on/off purposes like the level and histogram. I use "swipe" for magnification.


That, and the control ring on the RF lenses for the exposure compensation. Brilliant! Talk about EOS R bad ergonomics ...


----------



## scyrene (Feb 3, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> There are no good 180mm Macros left for EF system with discontinuation of Sigma 180mm OS. There are already compatibility issues with Sigma 180mm on EOS-R and with release of these new cameras the problem will just get worse and no option to upgrade firmware as its older pre Global Vision lens. Rest all macro lenses I own work just fine with EOS R as most of them are Manual focus macro with 100mm L being the only AF macro in my kit.



That's interesting, and a pity, as I recently got the Sigma 180 again! Not that I'm looking at an R body any time soon.


----------



## mjg79 (Feb 3, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> So Sony has almost caught up with Canon with TCs.
> The 100-400mm L MII and both 1.4X and 2X MIII ihas been for years virtually no difference if the converter is on or off.
> So yes, with the RF mount, Canon should take another major leap ahead optics wise.



Though Sony does it with converters half the size - so right now they are actually probably the best (putting aside all the usual Sony quality control and build quality questions). Indeed actually if you take size into consideration, Sony has the best teleconverters bar none. If you haven't held them in your hand do so if you get a chance, you'll be shocked - their 1.4x feels not much bigger than lens cap when on the camera. It makes them nice to handle too, avoiding putting the centre of gravity even further forward with long lenses.

See how the Sony 2x is comparable in size to the canon 1.4x. I really think Canon will bring out some amazing RF teleconverters. It does appear to be an area, like wide angle lenses, where mirrorless designs pay dividends.


----------



## preppyak (Feb 3, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> Most people will probably shoot at 4K60 or 4K30. 4K120* is for special situations where a 2x crop might not even be that big a deal.* It's not like 8K30 is a replacement for 4K120, they're completely different beasts.


Yep, how often are you shooting 15mm full-frame slow-motion? And NEED it to be wider than say, the 22mm you could get with a Canon EF 11-24mm attached? A lot more slow-mo work is done at 50+mm anyway


----------



## croviking (Feb 3, 2020)

wockawocka said:


> The R6 interests me a lot for weddings.


I wouldn't marry it. Maybe as a side chick.


----------



## BillB (Feb 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I did not know the camera benchmark is eye auto focus.


The current internet benchmark is whatever Sony has that can be said to be better than what Canon has. So eye auto focus is a benchmark but dual pixel AF, touchscreen control management and AF, or better color science are not benchmarks.


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 3, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> The Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L is that bad?





ahsanford said:


> Is the 180L too old/slow/soft for you? It's still in production.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I found AF to be quite slow compared to either 100mm and Sigma 180mm OS macro. Also for some reason its not very popular with butterfly group here and almost all butterfliers I know own 180mm OS for for either EF or F mounts.


scyrene said:


> That's interesting, and a pity, as I recently got the Sigma 180 again! Not that I'm looking at an R body any time soon.


What camera body do you use? I found it works perfectly with 80D but since EOS R I used was a rental didnt risk using 180mm OS with that body. I am planning to get RP soon as its discounted quite heavily and it is very tempting for the price.


----------



## Trey T (Feb 3, 2020)

Likely the real news:
*Canon EOS R5 (*assume sub $4k camera)

45mp full-frame CMOS
IBIS
12fps / 20fps ; *FF / crop, respsectively*
8K @ 30p ; *external recording*
4K @ 120p ; *external recording*
4K @ 60p ; *external recording*
Rumored announcement date of February 13, 2020 

*4K @ 120p and 8k is far fetch; unbelievable. They will need at least the 4K @ 60p to stay competitive to Panny. Historically, Canon's business of video (cinema or dslr) is always behind in the market. If any of these comes true, their business practice have to be transformed dramatically.*


----------



## navastronia (Feb 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I did not know the camera benchmark is eye auto focus.


----------



## davidhfe (Feb 3, 2020)

Trey T said:


> Likely the real news:
> *Canon EOS R5 (*assume sub $4k camera)
> 
> 45mp full-frame CMOS
> ...



Canon can either read and process the data off a 45mp chip at 30fps or they can't. As others have pointed out, these sorts of frame rates can be handled via mobile-class processors. If Canon can read the chip that fast, then there's no reason you can't internally record those frame rates. There's also no need for a crop at 20fps—the rumor seems pretty clear about the differentiator being the mechanical vs electronic shutter (something it seems like people are still really confused about!)

Historically, Canon started the whole video thing with the 5D2, and they also had the best sensors for the first years of the digital revolution. I agree that they've been a solid 2+ years behind on their bodies in some key areas (DR, readout speed) but getting "better chips" from a company that has a core business around "designing and producing chips" is not a "dramatic transformation" of their business.


----------



## Juangrande (Feb 3, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> Do they? Are you sure? Sounds like fake news


I use strobes indoors and outdoors pretty much for all my work and I would never use a frame grab or constant lights. You can’t control the ambient exposure outdoors with constant lights (unless you have a movie set lights on trucks) and even indoors on location constant is inferior to strobes, also I need the highest quality raw file and frame grabs aren’t full raw.


----------



## Juangrande (Feb 3, 2020)

PhotoSiem said:


> Not entirely, there is a shift to video and photo combination, which also leads to continues lightning, which let photographers use continues lightning, also for Pro's. There would a frame grab more relevant and sufficient.
> 
> And wait, what are pro's? In my opinion Pro's are people that make content and images that works.There is no specific way to create such work.


I would never use frame grabs or constant lights


----------



## scyrene (Feb 3, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> What camera body do you use? I found it works perfectly with 80D but since EOS R I used was a rental didnt risk using 180mm OS with that body. I am planning to get RP soon as its discounted quite heavily and it is very tempting for the price.



I'm mostly using my old 5D3 and still hope to get a 90D soon. The R series is interesting, but I'm not tempted enough yet


----------



## highdesertmesa (Feb 3, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> One possibility for the delay of the high res R is that there was a problem on the sensor during fabrication meaning that they needed to make a change for full production. Could easily account for a few months' delay.



I'm still futility and with complete loss of reason hoping that we'll see a scaled-up R5 sensor to 44x33 medium format. It would use the same RF mount with a small lineup of RFx lenses. This would also give us the ability to use existing RF/EF lenses as we do now by using 35mm crop mode – or – letting us use full 44x33. We know from the GFX, many EF lenses can cover 44x33, so some of the RF primes should as well like the f/1.2 RF 50 and 85.


----------



## Trey T (Feb 3, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> Canon can either read and process the data off a 45mp chip at 30fps or they can't. As others have pointed out, these sorts of frame rates can be handled via mobile-class processors. If Canon can read the chip that fast, then there's no reason you can't internally record those frame rates. There's also no need for a crop at 20fps—the rumor seems pretty clear about the differentiator being the mechanical vs electronic shutter (something it seems like people are still really confused about!)
> 
> Historically, Canon started the whole video thing with the 5D2, and they also had the best sensors for the first years of the digital revolution. I agree that they've been a solid 2+ years behind on their bodies in some key areas (DR, readout speed) but getting "better chips" from a company that has a core business around "designing and producing chips" is not a "dramatic transformation" of their business.


You're gonna have to substantiate the claims, not echoing rumors; e.g. make comparison with Canon's line-up or the current market devices (of similar segment).

I still tell people that the IQ of 5Dii is still relevant today comparing to the 5Div; my first DSLR in 2008. Since the advent of video DSLR in 2008, Canon had never made dramatic stride to be the strongest competitor in the video/cinema department. Even the 5Dii was problematic for over a year, and Magic Latern (and GH1) community pushed Canon to revised the firmware, to having proper-30P and then 24p.

If R5 features are to be true, then we will likely to see the pricing structured similar to the 1Dc 4K in 2012 for $10K+.


----------



## fabao (Feb 3, 2020)

mjg79 said:


> That's a lovely set up!
> 
> I am still using my EF 24-70 2.8L II adapted on the R. I have been tempted by the RF 24-70L IS mainly for the IS as I don't believe there is much optical improvement over the EF... but I think what really is stopping me buying it is the feeling that deep down I want the 28-70/2! Especially at the moment - the Rf 24-70 prices have dropped a bit but they are still obviously high thanks to its recent introduction while the 28-70 has settled a bit and at least in England currently isn't a crazy amount more than the 24-70.
> 
> How have you found having the 28-70 paired up with those two? I was expecting it to look much bigger than the 15-35! Can you enjoy walking around with it?



I used to have the 24-70 EF version. I got the 28-70 for something more unique. I can always cover the 24-28 2.8 range with the 15-35 2.8. So what the heck? The size is.. interesting. But you get used to it. Image quality is spectacular!


----------



## fabao (Feb 3, 2020)

fabao said:


> I used to have the 24-70 EF version. I got the 28-70 for something more unique. I can always cover the 24-28 2.8 range with the 15-35 2.8. So what the heck? The size is.. interesting. But you get used to it. Image quality is spectacular!


 
With an F2 zoom, I also feel no need to get any primes on that focal length range.


----------



## landscaper (Feb 3, 2020)

As a professional landscape photographer I've been waiting for over 2 years through hundreds of rumours of the upcoming Canon High Megapixel Camera:
CANON-RS
touted to be 75 to 100 Megapixels

This would be a huge benefit for me as I print 40x60 inches and larger

If Canon doesn't announce a high megapixel camera body in February 2020 I will be reluctantly jumping ship to Sony and buying the A7r4 or the rumoured Nikon D900 (with the Sony 64 Megapixel Sensor) or even possibly the upcoming 100 megapixel Fuji GFX Lite Body

I would much rather stick with Canon

I love their hardware and have been a Canon Aficionado since 1980 when I got my Canon A1 film camera.

The new RF lenses look simply amazing and will only continue to expand their offerings

I think Sony can be consistently relied upon to upgrade their camera bodies every 24 months and they have more resources in their sensor fabrication and electronics to stay on the cutting edge

I don't give a Rat's Ass about video although and 8K time lapse function would be great.
A 45 megapixel catch-all generalist body is not what I'm looking for.

However painful selling off my Canon 5D4 / 5DSr and 6 L series lenses is : I am almost ready. 

PLEASE Canon if you're listening give the studio and landscape photographers a reason to stay.


----------



## Dantana (Feb 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> People don't understand frame grabs. You still have to shoot at a shutter speed appropriate for stopping action, which is not the same shutter speed as you would use for video. Shooting at 1/60 sec (normal video) or even at 1/250 sec (for slo-mo) is only going to get you thousands of blurred images. You can shoot at 1/1000 second, but then the video will look like crap. The key to smooth video is to blur the action from one frame to the next, hardly conducive to frame grabs.


Thank you. Drives me nuts seeing the "just pull a frame" comments all the time. 2 completely different things.


----------



## seasonascent (Feb 3, 2020)

With a 2x crop, I'd gladly whack a sigma 18-35 on there which would mean I'm getting 4k 120p with a 36-70mm with creamy bokeh. I don't see the problem here 


preppyak said:


> Yep, how often are you shooting 15mm full-frame slow-motion? And NEED it to be wider than say, the 22mm you could get with a Canon EF 11-24mm attached? A lot more slow-mo work is done at 50+mm anyway


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 3, 2020)

landscaper said:


> As a professional landscape photographer I've been waiting for over 2 years through hundreds of rumours of the upcoming Canon High Megapixel Camera:
> CANON-RS
> touted to be 75 to 100 Megapixels
> 
> ...


----------



## mistaspeedy (Feb 3, 2020)

I see many people comment that 4k is hardly better than 1080p. I think that 99% of tests are invalid and that the true comparisons are yet to come.
Most of those comparisons are comparing footage that was shot at 4k (or lower resolutions that were upsampled to 4k), and then comparing it to 1080p footage that was downsampled from 4k.
A proper test would be to shoot at 8k, then downsample to 4K so that you have super sharp 4K image. Then compare this to 1080p downsampled from 8k or 4k.

Any comparisons with youtube/netflix etc are not valid, since the quality gets destroyed in compression.

A lot of big budget hollywood movies are shot on the 2.6K Arri Alexa cameras.
Even when movies get shot at 4k or higher resolution, they usually end up making a 2K digital intermediate master. They then use this 2K master to make the '4k' blurays.
Even if a movie was shot at 8k, downsampled and mastered in 4K, and released to 4K bluray, it will still be only 4:2:0 and not fully using 4K screens to their potential.

What I am saying is that, super sharp 4K footage seems to be incredibly hard to find.... and that only with the release of 8K cameras will 4K screens be able to really fully show their potential - and that right there is another use for 8k, besides the already mentioned extra room to crop for composition or for warp stabilization etc.

Testing the screens with high resolution still images or video games might be a better way to judge the screens if we dont have the high quality footage.

Optical media and especially streaming/broadcasting cannot keep up with increases in screen technology


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 3, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> Canon can either read and process the data off a 45mp chip at 30fps or they can't. As others have pointed out, these sorts of frame rates can be handled via mobile-class processors. If Canon can read the chip that fast, then there's no reason you can't internally record those frame rates. There's also no need for a crop at 20fps—the rumor seems pretty clear about the differentiator being the mechanical vs electronic shutter (something it seems like people are still really confused about!)
> 
> Historically, Canon started the whole video thing with the 5D2, and they also had the best sensors for the first years of the digital revolution. I agree that they've been a solid 2+ years behind on their bodies in some key areas (DR, readout speed) but getting "better chips" from a company that has a core business around "designing and producing chips" is not a "dramatic transformation" of their business.


Aren't mobile-class processors handling frame rates from teeny tiny sensors?


----------



## [email protected] (Feb 3, 2020)

fabao said:


> With an F2 zoom, I also feel no need to get any primes on that focal length range.



I used to use the Sigma 24-35 f/2 on my EF bodies, and it was both so sharp a lens and so fast a lens that I never felt the need for the f/1.4 primes. In fact, my Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art was sold because it wasn't quite as good as the zoom at 24mm.

So I can confirm from experience that once a zoom gets to f/2, and it's as sharp as a prime, it's a preferable lens, at least for me. With a 28-70 focal range, I'd love to use that RF lens. Hoping against rational hope that the rumors are true, so a worthy* body is coming along. 

-tig

*Worthy for me = >30 megapixels and >7 fps with full continuous autofocus. If *only* the megapixel and frame rates are true in this R5 rumor, I'd be a happy buyer of 2 of them.


----------



## Optics Patent (Feb 3, 2020)

Diltiazem said:


> R = first attempt at FF mirrorless and probably won't have a successor



I see the R5 and R6 etc. as the successors to the R.


----------



## Dantana (Feb 3, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Aren't mobile-class processors handling frame rates from teeny tiny sensors?


I believe the technical term is "itsy bitsy"


----------



## Architect1776 (Feb 3, 2020)

mjg79 said:


> Though Sony does it with converters half the size - so right now they are actually probably the best (putting aside all the usual Sony quality control and build quality questions). Indeed actually if you take size into consideration, Sony has the best teleconverters bar none. If you haven't held them in your hand do so if you get a chance, you'll be shocked - their 1.4x feels not much bigger than lens cap when on the camera. It makes them nice to handle too, avoiding putting the centre of gravity even further forward with long lenses.
> 
> See how the Sony 2x is comparable in size to the canon 1.4x. I really think Canon will bring out some amazing RF teleconverters. It does appear to be an area, like wide angle lenses, where mirrorless designs pay dividends.



Size?
Sony lenses are monsters and weigh more than the Canon ones.
The TCs are "Smaller" due to no need for mirror clearance. Not how far the back sticks out un protected.
Additionally the Sony mount is microscopic compared to Canon EF and RF (Nikon Z as well) it is even smaller than the M mount which is tiny. That is why Canon RF lenses are so incredible compared to Sony.
Let us see what happens with RF TCs.


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Feb 3, 2020)

I actually think you agree
1.Canon didn’t respond with updates like ibis and mirrorless in a timely fashion and gave Sony life. if the reason was that their fav was delayed then so be it. The reason isn’t important to me as a customer.
2. I agree that canon should have done rf sooner but I assure you they wouldn’t have done it without Sony blazing a trail. Ford wouldn’t have created the mustang E if it wasn’t for Tesla. Mirrorless itself, Ibis, better DR, eye Af and Af tracking ala mirrorless and smaller bodies all feel like reactionary changes from canon.
3. I don’t think I said that canon panicked. They don’t have to panic because they have a core group of photographers that have canon lenses and will only switch as a last resort. But they didn’t lead on several features and had to react. My verbiage is that the R was rushed. At launch it was unimpressive and the firmware updates were its true destiny. Canon needs to release the R at that time even though it was half baked without the latest firmware. Canon had its new lenses ready before its bodies. It also understood that new photographers were either buying dead end rebels or non canon mirrorless cameras.

every Consumer company has soft advertising. Leaks, influencers, fan websites, etc are all options. I wouldn’t put anything past a big company like canon. They wanted to stop defections in 2019 while they prep eared their response.

my 2 cents 

QUOTE="canonnews, post: 814046, member: 380139"]
I disagree.

The RF mount was a natural progression as was the 1.0 camera bodies.

None of them could have been done until Canon updated their fab to produce DPAF full frame sensors, once it was done, and the decision was made to use the RF mount (most likely because of IBIS + IS) then releasing the cameras made a lot of sense. To do it later, would have been progressively harder because Canon would have most likely released the 1DX Mark III, the 5D Mark V,etc camera bodies which would have made it even more difficult for EF users to transition over to the RF mount.

As it is the 5D Mark IV is difficult enough for people to decide to move to the EOS R system, perhaps with the R5 Canon will have a compelling body. For this reason alone, Canon should have done the RF mount sooner. Nothing to do with Sony,etc.

But to say Canon panicked? How can they when it takes around 3+ years to develop a camera?

Canon also doesn't leak.

If Canon wanted the world to know - they'd do a development announcement.
[/QUOTE]


canonnews said:


> I disagree.
> 
> The RF mount was a natural progression as was the 1.0 camera bodies.
> 
> ...


----------



## davidhfe (Feb 4, 2020)

preppyak said:


> Yep, how often are you shooting 15mm full-frame slow-motion? And NEED it to be wider than say, the 22mm you could get with a Canon EF 11-24mm attached? A lot more slow-mo work is done at 50+mm anyway



If you need wide at those sorts of crops you have a pretty good set of EF-S/S35/sigma DC options as well. AF is probably not on the table for 4K 120 anyways.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 4, 2020)

Trey T said:


> Likely the real news:
> *Canon EOS R5 (*assume sub $4k camera)
> 
> 45mp full-frame CMOS
> ...



I hate to plug CN.. but I don't think Craig minds, he plugs me on twitter, etc all the time.









Canon Thoughts - The internet loses its mind


It seems the internet has weighed in with the Canon EOS R5. With some interesting, and even some amusing takes. Let's be real here. The EOS R1 (or whatever it will be called - I think if it's an R5 and R6, odds are very good it's an R1) is coming in 2021. Canon is going to leave things off...



www.canonnews.com





I went into the math about all that 8k 30p isn't that much of a stretch if we consider what the 1DX Mark III can do.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 4, 2020)

landscaper said:


> As a professional landscape photographer I've been waiting for over 2 years through hundreds of rumours of the upcoming Canon High Megapixel Camera:
> CANON-RS
> touted to be 75 to 100 Megapixels



I know it feels like over 2 years, but that's impossible 

But I agree, I've been waiting for either this new 120MP DSLR or related R camera for a while now. I had it budgeted for last september and now i have it budgeted for early summer.

I wouldn't be surprised to see it for Canon EXPO in September. but that's just my educated guess.


----------



## Uneternal (Feb 4, 2020)

I still don't really believe that Canon would go and totally wreck their just released 1DX Mark III with a camera that beats it in about every spec.
But let's wait and see what the Canon cripple hammer will bring.
My guess would be: No dualpixel AF in 8K and 4K 120p modes, no RAW recording and a price tag of more than 6500 dollars.
Anything less then that and they can basically give their 1DX3 to the birds.


----------



## canonnews (Feb 4, 2020)

Uneternal said:


> I still don't really believe that Canon would go and totally wreck their just released 1DX Mark III with a camera that beats it in about every spec.
> But let's wait and see what the Canon cripple hammer will bring.
> My guess would be: No dualpixel AF in 8K and 4K 120p modes, no RAW recording and a price tag of more than 6500 dollars.
> Anything less then that and they can basically give their 1DX3 to the birds.



sure if you ignore battery life, durability, optical viewfinder, native EF mount, 1 series ergonomics, etc. While it will raise questions about the 1DX Mark III its not as if the two are looking at the same customers.

also .. cripple hammer? really?  if 8K 30p doesn't have AF / DPAF it's "crippled"? seriously?

That just makes my teeth ache


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 4, 2020)

PhotoSiem said:


> Not entirely, there is a shift to video and photo combination, which also leads to continues lightning, which let photographers use continues lightning, also for Pro's. There would a frame grab more relevant and sufficient.
> 
> And wait, what are pro's? In my opinion Pro's are people that make content and images that works.There is no specific way to create such work.



The best still photographers getting paid for their work still use flash for most of their best images. Constant lighting does not hold a candle to the flexibility and power available with strobes.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 4, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The best still photographers getting paid for their work still use flash for most of their best images.



I don't mean any offense, but this is purely your opinion, unless you have any numbers to back it up.


Michael Clark said:


> Constant lighting does not hold a candle to the flexibility and power available with strobes.



Only in the last 10 years, with the invention of powerful and portable LED arrays, has constant lighting become truly viable for photographers --- but make no mistake, constant lighting can _absolutely_ replace flash when you're photographing human subjects, as long as you invest in good panels. There are also marked advantages to using constant lighting, including WYSIWYG exposure (which saves time when you're setting up your shots) and less pupil dilation in your models' eyes.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Feb 4, 2020)

landscaper said:


> As a professional landscape photographer I've been waiting for over 2 years through hundreds of rumours of the upcoming Canon High Megapixel Camera:
> CANON-RS
> touted to be 75 to 100 Megapixels
> 
> ...


You joined yesterday and this is your first post? Ta-ra then.


----------



## Ph0t0 (Feb 4, 2020)

navastronia said:


> I don't mean any offense, but this is purely your opinion, unless you have any numbers to back it up.



Of course he doesn't have the numbers, because I doubt they are running statistics on type of lights being used by photographers, but from what I have seen i would say it is a pretty good opinion.
The only advantage of constant lighting is being able to see the light that you are going to get on your photo. And disadvantages are more power consumption, bigger and heavier lights and batteries, lack of lstrong lights that can fit established bayonets for lighting accesories on them, small pupils and bad expressions on models faces when using brighter lights.
Have you tried using constant lights outdoors on a bright day? BTW how easy is it to fit accesories like softboxes and snouts on those LED panels?



navastronia said:


> There are also marked advantages to using constant lighting, including WYSIWYG exposure (which saves time when you're setting up your shots) and less pupil dilation in your models' eyes.



What do you mean less dilation? Models sure love it when you shine those LED lights directly into their eyes.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 4, 2020)

canonnews said:


> sure if you ignore battery life, durability, optical viewfinder, native EF mount, 1 series ergonomics, etc. While it will raise questions about the 1DX Mark III its not as if the two are looking at the same customers.
> 
> also .. cripple hammer? really?  if 8K 30p doesn't have AF / DPAF it's "crippled"? seriously?
> 
> That just makes my teeth ache



THANK YOU!


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 4, 2020)

Ph0t0 said:


> What do you mean less dilation? Models sure love it when you shine those LED lights directly into their eyes.



Not sure if models love it or hate it, but dilation means pupils are open, normally it happens in low light, abnormally - under drugs. I suspect navastronia wasn't referring to any drugs though, but the fact that pupils shrink under the constant LED light.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 4, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Not sure if models love it or hate it, but dilation means pupils are open, normally it happens in low light, abnormally - under drugs. I suspect navastronia wasn't referring to any drugs though, but the fact that pupils shrink under the constant LED light.



Yeah, I took it to mean, with a flash your eyes are adapted to the lower light, so when the flash hits and the picture is taken, your pupils don't have time to react and so are larger (dilated) in the image, whereas with constant lighting they'd be more constricted, as you say. I'm not sure which people generally prefer in images.


----------



## Ph0t0 (Feb 4, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Not sure if models love it or hate it, but dilation means pupils are open, normally it happens in low light, abnormally - under drugs. I suspect navastronia wasn't referring to any drugs though, but the fact that pupils shrink under the constant LED light.


 
And why would closed pupils and squinting be preferred?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 4, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I'm not sure which people generally prefer in images.



People generally prefer cats with dilated pupils, of course.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 4, 2020)

Ph0t0 said:


> And why would closed pupils and squinting be preferred?


I dunno. Maybe that way people look smarter as if they were thinking about some complex issues, like future Canon releases.

In practice dilated pupils hide eye colour and also cause red eye effect, although the latter shouldn't be a problem with a proper light setup.


----------



## Ph0t0 (Feb 4, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> People generally prefer cats with dilated pupils, of course.
> 
> View attachment 188540


 
Yes a very common problem when shooting models. Pupils that are just too dilated


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 4, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Yeah, I took it to mean, with a flash your eyes are adapted to the lower light, so when the flash hits and the picture is taken, your pupils don't have time to react and so are larger (dilated) in the image, whereas with constant lighting they'd be more constricted, as you say. I'm not sure which people generally prefer in images.



AFAIK, people prefer dilated pupils, same as they prefer catch light in the eyes. It is sufficiently well known for one of my photography teachers to warn us that pre-flash for focusing might cause pupils to close down, and describe some techniques he used in film days to make pupils appear larger and add catch lights.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 4, 2020)

mjg79 said:


> Though Sony does it with converters half the size - so right now they are actually probably the best (putting aside all the usual Sony quality control and build quality questions). Indeed actually if you take size into consideration, Sony has the best teleconverters bar none. If you haven't held them in your hand do so if you get a chance, you'll be shocked - their 1.4x feels not much bigger than lens cap when on the camera. It makes them nice to handle too, avoiding putting the centre of gravity even further forward with long lenses.
> 
> See how the Sony 2x is comparable in size to the canon 1.4x. I really think Canon will bring out some amazing RF teleconverters. It does appear to be an area, like wide angle lenses, where mirrorless designs pay dividends.



Take the rear caps off and most of the difference goes up in smoke, especially if you look at the furthest forward extension.


----------



## Equinox (Feb 4, 2020)

People need to accept the


landscaper said:


> As a professional landscape photographer I've been waiting for over 2 years through hundreds of rumours of the upcoming Canon High Megapixel Camera:
> CANON-RS
> touted to be 75 to 100 Megapixels
> 
> ...





landscaper said:


> As a professional landscape photographer I've been waiting for over 2 years through hundreds of rumours of the upcoming Canon High Megapixel Camera:
> CANON-RS
> touted to be 75 to 100 Megapixels
> 
> ...




Nice one you joined yesterday! LOL

The standard Canon 5 series has always been a jack of all trades....why would it suddenly become a ultra high MP camera? 

Canon will release a Canon 5Rs soon enough, hold your horses. The landscapes are not going anywhere!


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 4, 2020)

navastronia said:


> I don't mean any offense, but this is purely your opinion, unless you have any numbers to back it up.
> 
> 
> Only in the last 10 years, with the invention of powerful and portable LED arrays, has constant lighting become truly viable for photographers --- but make no mistake, constant lighting can _absolutely_ replace flash when you're photographing human subjects, as long as you invest in good panels. There are also marked advantages to using constant lighting, including WYSIWYG exposure (which saves time when you're setting up your shots) and less pupil dilation in your models' eyes.



Have you ever actually used studio strobes? You know, those with adjustable modeling lights? If you want your models pupils closed down, you can do that. If you want them larger, you can do that, too. Like I said way above, they're more flexible than constant lighting.

You can also get fuller spectrum and more color consistency at a far lower cost than with LEDs.

Look at most high end fashion magazine work and tell me whether larger or smaller pupils are generally preferred by those who pay for those images.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 4, 2020)

navastronia said:


> There are also marked advantages to using constant lighting, including WYSIWYG exposure (which saves time when you're setting up your shots) and less pupil dilation in your models' eyes.



As I've said before, WYSIWYG is the equivalent of training wheels for those who don't understand light and how a camera sees it. 

Beyond that, with proportional modeling lights on studio strobes, you get the same thing without blinding your model at full power for the entire session. You can also avoid the disadvantages of constant lighting. You can turn the modeling lights off once you're through adjusting power ratios.


----------



## BillB (Feb 4, 2020)

seasonascent said:


> With a 2x crop, I'd gladly whack a sigma 18-35 on there which would mean I'm getting 4k 120p with a 36-70mm with creamy bokeh. I don't see the problem here


Agree, but that won't stop Sony cyber flacks and other Canon bashers from trying to make it a problem.


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Feb 4, 2020)

Independent reviewers all agree that canon fell behind

here are some examples
mirrorless
Processing speed
Ibis

Canon makes the best lenses but they fell behind on bodies and are now responding nicely this year 



unfocused said:


> I disagree with these statements. There really isn't anything to substantiate that Canon "has been behind tech wise." There are differences between manufacturers, but Canon is not "behind" in any significant way.
> 
> People keep saying the R was rushed or somehow incomplete. But, that assessment usually comes from people who don't use the camera.
> 
> ...


----------



## navastronia (Feb 4, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> As I've said before, WYSIWYG is the equivalent of training wheels for those who don't understand light and how a camera sees it.



Got it. It sounds like you’re just philosophically opposed to WYSIWYG. Which is fine, I guess, but I think it’s more useful to be less ideologically minded about photography. If it helps me get the image, I’ll use it.


----------



## Dexter75 (Feb 4, 2020)

R5 specs are a Canon fanboy fantasy and not going to happen. R6 sounds believable but I’m sure Canon will find a way to cripple it as they always do and it’s going to cost at least $3k. Canon needs more affordable RF lenses and like now, not next year after a ton more people have already moved on to systems that don’t charge $2200 for lenses.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 4, 2020)

navastronia said:


> Got it. It sounds like you’re just philosophically opposed to WYSIWYG. Which is fine, I guess, but I think it’s more useful to be less ideologically minded about photography. If it helps me get the image, I’ll use it.



It's not that I'm opposed to it, it's great for casual shooters. Just like scene modes are. 

I do think it is waaaay overrated by the camera spec wars crowd who've never sold an image to a commercial customer in their life when talking about "pro" level cameras. How many "Scene" modes do the Canon 1-Series and Nikon D5/D4/D3/... series have? There are some things the real pros don't need.


----------



## tron (Feb 4, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> It's not that I'm opposed to it, it's great for casual shooters. Just like scene modes are.
> 
> I do think it is waaaay overrated by the camera spec wars crowd who've never sold an image to a commercial customer in their life when talking about "pro" level cameras. How many "Scene" modes do the Canon 1-Series and Nikon D5/D4/D3/... series have? There are some things the real pros don't need.


Well the only useful about scene modes is that by setting the camera to neutral we have a more realistic histogram view and an EVF with less contrast.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 4, 2020)

tron said:


> Well the only useful about scene modes is that by setting the camera to neutral we have a more realistic histogram view and an EVF with less contrast.



"Neutral" is a 'Picture Style'. Nikon calls it 'Picture Control'.

Scene modes are automatic modes labeled for things like "Beach" and "Kids" and "Night Portrait" and 'Fireworks".

Two totally different things.


----------



## tron (Feb 4, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> "Neutral" is a 'Picture Style'. Nikon calls it 'Picture Control'.
> 
> Scene modes are automatic modes labeled for things like "Beach" and "Kids" and "Night Portrait" and 'Fireworks".
> 
> Two totally different things.


OK!!! I haven't used them and I had forgotten about them. Now I remembered they existed on some compact cameras...


----------



## Eersel (Feb 4, 2020)

If Canon is in fact calling this the R5, they have done Sony dirty. I mean A7RV at some point and an R5 Canon on the market will be fun from a retail stand point.

I like this.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 4, 2020)

tron said:


> OK!!! I haven't used them and I had forgotten about them. Now I remembered they existed on some compact cameras...



Canon EOS x0D, xx0D, and xx00D models all have scene modes. xD models do not.

The fact that the 7D and 7D mark II do not have a "sports" mode ought to tell you something if you're listening...


----------



## tron (Feb 4, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Canon EOS x0D, xx0D, and xx00D models all have scene modes. xD models do not.
> 
> The fact that the 7D and 7D mark II do not have a "sports" mode ought to tell you something if you're listening...


Used to have a 40D which unfortunately was stolen. But I had never used them. Then I got a 5DII and now 5DIV, 5DsR and 7DII.
So the 200D I had gotten for my mother and used a little myself will have them! OK I can't check it now.
I may have come across them long time ago back in the film days. I just remembered somethin and checked my damaged EOS 50E film camera and found them! I hadn't used them even back then. I had started with EOS 620 and I used either Tv or Av. That camera didn't have them if I recall correctly. Just P, Av, Tv, M.


----------



## davo (Feb 5, 2020)

8K @ 30fps?..,.....absolutely...... audio-only.


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Feb 5, 2020)

WhereDoWeGoFrmHere said:


> If it comes with 2 card slots it would suit my needs for event work quite well. But I doubt it will.


Even if the R5 and R6 have 2 card slots, I doubt it will record video to both. The 1D/5D series always recorded only to one.


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Feb 5, 2020)

IWLP said:


> I just watched a Super Bowl delivered in 720p. Sorry if I have a hard time getting excited about 4K, much less 8K.


Still waiting for good 1080p from Canon on their mirrorless. Compared results from my C100 with the RP (both in 1080p) and one looks like 4k and the other one 720p


----------



## kocmonabt (Feb 5, 2020)

What could QX10 be?
The last line of the article.


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Feb 5, 2020)

kocmonabt said:


> What could QX10 be?
> The last line of the article.


10k video camera?


----------



## JGalicki (Feb 5, 2020)

Something might be too good to be true regarding the R5 specs. It doesn't' make sense that Canon would so quickly overshadow the 1DX III coming out this month. Why would someone buy the 1DX III when they can wait a few months and get a camera that's more than double the resolution and almost or just as fast? Is the auto-focus much slower, smaller buffer....? Hoping there will be more clarity in the coming days on this as I was planning on getting the 1DX III but not sure it's a wise decision. I'd have no problem using an adapter for my EF telephoto lenses with the R5 if it's actually all true in terms of what's being said.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 6, 2020)

JGalicki said:


> Something might be too good to be true regarding the R5 specs. It doesn't' make sense that Canon would so quickly overshadow the 1DX III coming out this month. Why would someone buy the 1DX III when they can wait a few months and get a camera that's more than double the resolution and almost or just as fast? Is the auto-focus much slower, smaller buffer....? Hoping there will be more clarity in the coming days on this as I was planning on getting the 1DX III but not sure it's a wise decision. I'd have no problem using an adapter for my EF telephoto lenses with the R5 if it's actually all true in terms of what's being said.



The 1-series is about more than specs. It's about durability and reliability while taking punishment day in and day out by those whose livelihoods depend on everything working every minute of every day.


----------



## IWLP (Feb 6, 2020)

Avenger 2.0 said:


> Still waiting for good 1080p from Canon on their mirrorless. Compared results from my C100 with the RP (both in 1080p) and one looks like 4k and the other one 720p



I actually prefer the 1080p off our EOS R bodies compared to our C100 II. Easier to grade, has a better look, IMO.


----------



## PiezoSwitch (Feb 6, 2020)

Pictures of the new EOS Rebel and 24-105 STM.

Google Drive


----------



## JGalicki (Feb 6, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The 1-series is about more than specs. It's about durability and reliability while taking punishment day in and day out by those whose livelihoods depend on everything working every minute of every day.


I'm not sure we can presume the R5 will not be durable or consistently reliable at this point. Specs do matter.


----------



## BillB (Feb 6, 2020)

JGalicki said:


> Something might be too good to be true regarding the R5 specs. It doesn't' make sense that Canon would so quickly overshadow the 1DX III coming out this month. Why would someone buy the 1DX III when they can wait a few months and get a camera that's more than double the resolution and almost or just as fast? Is the auto-focus much slower, smaller buffer....? Hoping there will be more clarity in the coming days on this as I was planning on getting the 1DX III but not sure it's a wise decision. I'd have no problem using an adapter for my EF telephoto lenses with the R5 if it's actually all true in terms of what's being said.


The F5 will not have the OVF, or optically based AF, and will likely have a smaller buffer. And matching a spec is not the same thing in my mind as overshadowing a more expensive camera. Under the circumstances, it might make sense to wait until we know what the R5 specs actually are before making a decision, or even until we get some reviews on the R5's performance.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 7, 2020)

JGalicki said:


> I'm not sure we can presume the R5 will not be durable or consistently reliable at this point. Specs do matter.



I'm pretty sure we can also assume it won't be quite as robust as the 1-series bodies, either. The 5, 6, and 7 series of DSLRs were not as "bulletproof as the 1-series DSLRs.


----------



## Czardoom (Feb 8, 2020)

JGalicki said:


> Something might be too good to be true regarding the R5 specs. It doesn't' make sense that Canon would so quickly overshadow the 1DX III coming out this month. Why would someone buy the 1DX III when they can wait a few months and get a camera that's more than double the resolution and almost or just as fast? Is the auto-focus much slower, smaller buffer....? Hoping there will be more clarity in the coming days on this as I was planning on getting the 1DX III but not sure it's a wise decision. I'd have no problem using an adapter for my EF telephoto lenses with the R5 if it's actually all true in terms of what's being said.


Why would someone buy the 1DX III when they can wait to get the R5? Maybe because for the target consumer, 20 MP is better than 45. Maybe because for the target consumer an OVF is much better than an EVF. What you may think are better specs may not be better for others.


----------



## brad-man (Feb 8, 2020)

As the R5 falls more in line with my type of shooting than the 6, I look forward to see LR do a tear-down as I am most interested in the level of weather sealing. If it is to be a 5DV analogy, it should be substantial. So the question is can they stuff all of that goodness plus sealing into an R sized body, or will it grow...


----------



## JWest (Feb 9, 2020)

Trankilstef said:


> The question I ask myself is what is considered the more video centric camera between the R5 and R6 cameras? Looking at the specs it should be the R5 but mybe the video functions like the 8k or the 4k120 will have major crop, and on the opposite the low megapixel and specs of the R6 make it a mini 1dX MkIII? I really don't know how to consider either of thes rumored cameras in the Canon lineup.



Agreed. I was assuming that if I wanted the latest & best cameras, I'd of course be choosing the 1dx3 and the supposed "high Mp" R body coming. But if my main reasons for the 1dx3 are video and wildlife, the R5 sounds just as viable, if not better. However, I do like the sounds of the better low light in the 1dx3, but is that really going to be much different in a new model like the R5 with all those specs? Hard to believe. The way the 1dx2 feels to work with is just LOVE LOVE LOVE so it'll be hard to sway me away from the 3.


----------



## JWest (Feb 9, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The 1-series is about more than specs. It's about durability and reliability while taking punishment day in and day out by those whose livelihoods depend on everything working every minute of every day.



Yeah it's this reason that I am almost certainly getting the 1dx3 and the high Mp R body to replace the 1dx2 and 5dsr. Even though the 1dx3 Mp will remain the same, I am sure the anti-alias filter improvement will help it tighten up a little in appearance. It's almost as if the R5 will be the consumer camera as a single do-it-all choice that is more affordable than either of the other two I'll be getting.


----------



## JGalicki (Feb 10, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> Why would someone buy the 1DX III when they can wait to get the R5? Maybe because for the target consumer, 20 MP is better than 45. Maybe because for the target consumer an OVF is much better than an EVF. What you may think are better specs may not be better for others.


I can see that desire for some sports photogs that need to get to press quick and want to optimize their workflow. That said, I generally don't run into many people these days that want less resolution, especially if they don't have to compromise on speed.


----------



## Michael Clark (Feb 11, 2020)

JGalicki said:


> I'm not sure we can presume the R5 will not be durable or consistently reliable at this point. Specs do matter.



There are various levels of durability and consistency, just as there are levels of specs. How much each weighs versus the other also varies from one user to the next.


----------



## slclick (Feb 11, 2020)

What are we, two days away from knowing more?


----------

