# Interview: Talking with Canon about the EOS R system and its future



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 10, 2018)

> An interview with Canon executives was done in Japan by MyNavi and covered a wide range of topics in regards to the brand new Canon EOS R system.
> Here are a few points from the interview (Google translated)
> During the launch event, it was reported that the Canon EOS R sensor was the same as the EOS 5D Mark IV’s sensor, but apparently, that’s not the case.
> *Mr. Kiyota* : The number of pixels itself is the same as EOS 5D Mark IV, but the sensor itself is newly developed. The content has changed a lot, such as adoption of a new dual pixel CMOS AF and arrangement of microlenses according to EOS R system. (Google Translated)
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

This indicates that the next two lenses canon will release will in 2019 and will be EF, not RF.


----------



## keithcooper (Sep 10, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> This indicates that the next two lenses canon will release will in 2019 and will be EF, not RF.


Is that from translating the text?

I thought it might refer to the 400 and 600


----------



## AlanF (Sep 10, 2018)

Digital lens optimiser is for jpeg and not RAW. So, if that's the biggest difference, then it is not a step up for me.


----------



## keithcooper (Sep 10, 2018)

The suggestions (albeit translated) that high and low end cameras move to EOS R is interesting
That's a 5Ds and 5D4 on the left - what's on the right...




I'm still wondering at what point I end up moving to EOS R - http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/yes-i-welcome-eos-r/


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

keithcooper said:


> Is that from translating the text?
> 
> I thought it might refer to the 400 and 600



My mistake, what I get for trying to view this on my iPhone. The two blue bars *are* the upgraded versions of the adapter, not new lenses as I initially thought. 

I was surprised to see a Canon lens roadmap, but this one has zero new information, which restores my faith in Canon's silence about future releases.


----------



## -pekr- (Sep 10, 2018)

Newly developed 5IDV like sensor? Why does not it utilise an electronic shutter, BSI and allow no crop 4K video then? I would say that they have just tweaked a 5DIV sensor to accomodate larger DPAF area and that's just it ...


----------



## MrAndre (Sep 10, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> It's from the graphic, which lists the four RF lenses announced, as well as two other concurrently announce lenses which are presumably the 400 and 600 III and have the EF–EOS R (adapter) notation appended. That same notation is applied to the two lenses slated for release in 2019 (top two blue bars).



I thought the 2 EF–EOS R (adapter) notation for 2018 are the two adapters being released right now (normal and with control ring) and the EF–EOS R (adapter) notation for 2019 are the adapters with cpl and nd filters.


----------



## nitram (Sep 10, 2018)

What is the meaning of the F 2.8L text? The line immediately below my screenshot translates to 'scheduled release.'


----------



## keithcooper (Sep 10, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> Newly developed 5IDV like sensor? Why does not it utilise an electronic shutter, BSI and allow no crop 4K video then? I would say that they have just tweaked a 5DIV sensor to accomodate larger DPAF area and that's just it ...


Because it's V1.0 of EOS R

What you want will be later - at this point, if you wanted that then you need a different system... ;-)

It's made to a market segment which I'm not in and neither are you it would seem?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

keithcooper said:


> The suggestions (albeit translated) that high and low end cameras move to EOS R is interesting...


Is that cameras moving, or *customers* moving? I suspect the intent is to show the latter.


----------



## amorse (Sep 10, 2018)

This really seems out of place to me. The portion where they mention that the EOS R is a 5D IV level camera doesn't fit in my mind. The 5D IV seems like the superior camera to me, and there's a considerable price differential between then. The EOS R seems more like a ramped up 6D II in my mind. Maybe that's splitting hairs to be fair.

I like that they're planning on building higher and lower level models, and the fact that they specifically mention high resolution bodies is encouraging for a 5D SR equivalent body. But if the EOS R is a 5D IV level camera, will the 5DSR equivalent just be an EOS R with a different sensor? I guess we'll find out.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

MrAndre said:


> I thought the 2 EF–EOS R (adapter) notation for 2018 are the two adapters being released right now (normal and with control ring) and the EF–EOS R (adapter) notation for 2019 are the adapters with cpl and nd filters.


Correct, I was evidently editing my post as you were typing a reply.


----------



## keithcooper (Sep 10, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Is that cameras moving, or *customers* moving? I suspect the intent is to show the latter.


Yes - it PR stuff and translated, so doubly prone to vagueness ;-)


----------



## MrAndre (Sep 10, 2018)

Am I counting that correctly? Is this graph suggesting 8 new lenses in 2019?


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 10, 2018)

nitram said:


> What is the meaning of the F 2.8L text? The line immediately below my screenshot translates to 'scheduled release.'
> 
> View attachment 180301



I think they are just saying they have a family of f2.8 lenses in the pipeline without saying too much on detail. They have the headline grabbing f2 lenses to get peoples' attention and now they will be looking after the bread-and-butter pros.
From what I remember of the Z6/Z7 announcement this eclipses Nikon's planned release schedule.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 10, 2018)

MrAndre said:


> Am I counting that correctly? Is this graph suggesting 8 new lenses in 2019?


That is how I am looking at it. That makes it very tempting!


----------



## Sharlin (Sep 10, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> Newly developed 5IDV like sensor? Why does not it utilise an electronic shutter, BSI and allow no crop 4K video then? I would say that they have just tweaked a 5DIV sensor to accomodate larger DPAF area and that's just it ...



If it’s a new sensor why isn’t it 150MP 32-bit global shutter capable of far IR and gamma-ray imaging? You see the problem with your argument? You and your kin seem to share the misguided idea that engineering iterations can always be cleanly divided into ”tweaks” and ”new products”. It doesn’t work like that in reality.
The R does have an electronic shutter, btw.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 10, 2018)

I read that this is the first R model and other models will fill out the line in the fullness of time. Stating that this is a 5 D level camera is marketing speak and can be spun in either direction.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 10, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Digital lens optimiser is for jpeg and not RAW. So, if that's the biggest difference, then it is not a step up for me.



It's also used in video. And I bet it's being used in live view/EVF as well.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 10, 2018)

koenkooi said:


> It's also used in video. And I bet it's being used in live view/EVF as well.


It's going to make not a damn of difference at the level of resolution in the EVF or on the rear screen when composing.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

AlanF said:


> It's going to make not a damn of difference at the level of resolution in the EVF or on the rear screen when composing.


No, but it’s huge when you can Bluetooth your jpgs to your iPhone then post them on low resolution social media. All the kids are doing that nowadays. 

Actually, application of the corrections to recorded video is a big deal, just not one I personally care about.


----------



## vjlex (Sep 10, 2018)

nitram said:


> What is the meaning of the F 2.8L text? The line immediately below my screenshot translates to 'scheduled release.'
> 
> View attachment 180301


"F2.8L Zoom lens, etc."
It's extremely vague, but gives the impression that other 2.8 zoom lenses or other lenses along those lines are scheduled to go on sale around that time.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 10, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> No, but it’s huge when you can Bluetooth your jpgs to your iPhone then post them on low resolution social media. All the kids are doing that nowadays.
> 
> Actually, application of the corrections to recorded video is a big deal, just not one I personally care about.


Are kids the market for this camera?


----------



## julius071 (Sep 10, 2018)

keithcooper said:


> The suggestions (albeit translated) that high and low end cameras move to EOS R is interesting
> That's a 5Ds and 5D4 on the left - what's on the right...
> 
> View attachment 180300
> ...


Yeah, what cameras are those to the right of the EOS R?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

julius071 said:


> Yeah, what cameras are those to the right of the EOS R?


Top two are 7DII and 80D. Bottom two are M5 and M6.


----------



## miketcool (Sep 10, 2018)

AlanF said:


> It's going to make not a damn of difference at the level of resolution in the EVF or on the rear screen when composing.



Pulling the vignetting out from F/1.2 or F/2 lenses live in the EVF is a big deal. It’s one of the advantages of having a screen to look through.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 10, 2018)

I think that they refer to it as a 5D level, but my 5D MK IV clearly has a lot of additional features that are just firmware and could be put in this camera, its better than a 6D possibly though.

It also reflects my opinion that Mirrorless cameras are over priced, it should cost less than a 6D and eventually will, once tooling and development costs are paid off. The lens prices will hold high until there is competition.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 10, 2018)

keithcooper said:


> The suggestions (albeit translated) that high and low end cameras move to EOS R is interesting
> That's a 5Ds and 5D4 on the left - what's on the right...
> 
> View attachment 180300
> ...


Yes, The camera has all the features that I would use, so I'm wondering why I'd pay more for a higher level model. I really am getting up there in age, and wonder how much longer I will be taking enough photos to justify a new camera, so it may be sooner rather than later.


----------



## -pekr- (Sep 10, 2018)

Sharlin said:


> If it’s a new sensor why isn’t it 150MP 32-bit global shutter capable of far IR and gamma-ray imaging? You see the problem with your argument? You and your kin seem to share the misguided idea that engineering iterations can always be cleanly divided into ”tweaks” and ”new products”. It doesn’t work like that in reality.
> The R does have an electronic shutter, btw.



Your reply is blown out of the proportions ironising what it is about imo. As Amorse states above, I find new R release mostly being a 6DIII without a mirror, not a 5DIV alternative, especially not in a AF area. Once R price goes lower, I wonder if ppl would still choose a 6DII instead?

Simply put - more and more it looks, like the crop in 4K is a technology limitation of recent sensor design, and not a marketing protection of the higher product line. And btw - when I mention an electronic shutter, I mean a global electronic shutter ....

There is something fishy about the situation and I did not found out yet, what it is  I think, there is more to the EOS R ecosystem, than is visible at first sight. E.g. - you can't use M lenses on R mount. You can't use R lenses on EF mount (I still expect DSLRs to be here for a while, so no cross-backup strategy). Yet Canon took the route.

My personal prediction (and not that it matters) is, that the next R camera will introduce more of a new technology, especially in a sensor area. If we've got basically a 5DIV's sensor in a mid-range R, then I think Canon has something in its sleeves for a high-end model. A R-evolution.


----------



## Bjorn Holmsen (Sep 10, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> This indicates that the next two lenses canon will release will in 2019 and will be EF, not RF.


It says the EF-EOS R adapter and the ring adapter will be released now. The drop in filter mount adapters, C-PL and ND, will be released end of 2018 (or beginning of 2019). 2.8L zooms "and so on" will be released from 2019 and onwards.


----------



## 6degrees (Sep 10, 2018)

Will Zeiss commit to produce high end lenses for Canon RF? Any road map?

At mean time, will the three Canon EF-RF adapters work seamlessly with, saying, Zeiss Milvus series as expected as EF series? Zeiss just released Milvus 1.4/35.


----------



## Bjorn Holmsen (Sep 10, 2018)

nitram said:


> What is the meaning of the F 2.8L text? The line immediately below my screenshot translates to 'scheduled release.'
> 
> View attachment 180301


It means F2.8L zooms and so on (or etc).


----------



## bf (Sep 10, 2018)

What will be the M future? Is there any official statement?


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 10, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> Newly developed 5IDV like sensor? Why does not it utilise an electronic shutter, BSI and allow no crop 4K video then? I would say that they have just tweaked a 5DIV sensor to accomodate larger DPAF area and that's just it ...



Canon has a long tradition of using the term "all new" for sensors that are merely adapted from one camera to another. There were dozens of 18mp sensors, each of which was "all new" relative to the last for a couple years back there. Maybe they consider an "all new" sensor to be one that isn't made from literally recycled parts. This camera's sensor is the 5d4 sensor with the adaptation of having microlenses that are made for the new flange difference. The performance, design, etc. is substantially identical to that of the 5d4's sensor.


----------



## Talys (Sep 10, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> Your reply is blown out of the proportions ironising what it is about imo. As Amorse states above, I find new R release mostly being a 6DIII without a mirror, not a 5DIV alternative, especially not in a AF area. Once R price goes lower, I wonder if ppl would still choose a 6DII instead?
> 
> Simply put - more and more it looks, like the crop in 4K is a technology limitation of recent sensor design, and not a marketing protection of the higher product line. And btw - when I mention an electronic shutter, I mean a global electronic shutter ....
> 
> ...



Well, that's like saying the 6DII is mostly a 5DIV with a flippy screen, which just isn't true for all sorts of obvious reasons. Personally, I would say that the R is more similar to a 5DIV than a 6D2 because of the sensor. Not just the resolution, obviously, but because of how it's positioned in Canon's lineup. Plus, lest we forget, you can't record 4k video on a 6D2.

From an AF perspective, there also look to be some 5D-level features that were explicitly removed from 6D2, like expanding AF points.

Regarding AF, it is my suspicion that the R will have the fastest autofocus speed of all mirrorless cameras built to date, but still be slower than 5D4 and D850, and probably even slower than 6D2 in raw autofocus speed (I hope to be pleasantly surprised to the contrary regarding the latter). Certainly, the A7R3 and A9 are vastly inferior in time to acquire autofocus when compared to 5D4 and 1DX2's dedicated PDAF sensors.


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 10, 2018)

I thought I read something that indicated that DLO was no longer just for JPGs, and that they were cooking the RAW with the corrections if it was chosen in the preferences. I could be wrong on that. I thought that was pretty cool until I saw the FPS ratings for the new R camera. 

I thought it was wonderful PR speak in this interview when he mentioned that they were doing the DLO stuff without it affecting the frame rate. Yeah, they have a whole 1/3rd of a second to get the DLO cooking done for each frame in focus-priority servo AF. In that time, they should be washing my car and mowing my lawn, too.


----------



## -pekr- (Sep 10, 2018)

bf said:


> What will be the M future? Is there any official statement?



No official statement I am aware of. It was my question too - Canon introduced a situation, where two MILC worlds are not lens-compatible one way to the other. Of course, maybe we will see nice M lens ecosystem over time, plus EF lenses are here to stay too, but some ppl might feel left in the water with their M cameras. For a while I thought, that the next iteration of M cameras, could see an R mount (47mm vs 54mm), but that would make the M bigger with an equivalent lens? Just dunno.


----------



## Talys (Sep 10, 2018)

[email protected] said:


> Canon has a long tradition of using the term "all new" for sensors that are merely adapted from one camera to another. There were dozens of 18mp sensors, each of which was "all new" relative to the last for a couple years back there. Maybe they consider an "all new" sensor to be one that isn't made from literally recycled parts. This camera's sensor is the 5d4 sensor with the adaptation of having microlenses that are made for the new flange difference. The performance, design, etc. is substantially identical to that of the 5d4's sensor.


All-new sensor, as opposed to, for example, the 80D sensor which appears in a ton of APSC cameras.

There's nothing wrong with iterating and adapting the excellent 5D4 sensor -- which, makes it a new sensor. Based on the sample RAWs we saw yesterday, I'm not disappointed so far; I'll reserve judgement for production models widely available in reviewers' hands.


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 10, 2018)

I have to agree with Talys that the R is a 6D2 + mirrorless features + 5D4 sensor (which the 6D2 should have had, and if it had had wouldn't be considered a disappointment relative to its previous positioning in the lineup).

The 5D4 is not a young camera. If the R is a 5 series, then it is taking away some key functionality from the mirrored 5 series (3 FPS in focus-priority servo AF mode) and indicating there shall be no sensor improvements in a 2 year span. I don't think a Canon engineer would proudly say, yes, this is our mirrorless 5 series. I think better of Canon than that, and expect to see a real 5 series equivalent at some point.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 10, 2018)

[email protected] said:


> I thought I read something that indicated that DLO was no longer just for JPGs, and that they were cooking the RAW with the corrections if it was chosen in the preferences. I could be wrong on that. I thought that was pretty cool until I saw the FPS ratings for the new R camera.
> 
> I thought it was wonderful PR speak in this interview when he mentioned that they were doing the DLO stuff without it affecting the frame rate. Yeah, they have a whole 1/3rd of a second to get the DLO cooking done for each frame in focus-priority servo AF. In that time, they should be washing my car and mowing my lawn, too.


In one of Rudy Winston's videos he talked about DLO then said it affected RAW only but baked the DLO settings into the raw where they will be read 
by the DPP software.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 10, 2018)

6degrees said:


> Will Zeiss commit to produce high end lenses for Canon RF? Any road map?
> 
> At mean time, will the three Canon EF-RF adapters work seamlessly with, saying, Zeiss Milvus series as expected as EF series? Zeiss just released Milvus 1.4/35.


If the major market moves to the R format, so will Zeiss. After all, they do want to sell lenses, and the closer flange will offer the opportunity to improve the optical quality of their product. I think they will be able to design lens, that with just a few parts differences will work for both R & Z. That is much easier with a manual focus lens.


----------



## -pekr- (Sep 10, 2018)

Talys said:


> Well, that's like saying the 6DII is mostly a 5DIV with a flippy screen, which just isn't true for all sorts of obvious reasons. Personally, I would say that the R is more similar to a 5DIV than a 6D2 because of the sensor. Not just the resolution, obviously, but because of how it's positioned in Canon's lineup. Plus, lest we forget, you can't record 4k video on a 6D2.
> 
> From an AF perspective, there also look to be some 5D-level features that were explicitly removed from 6D2, like expanding AF points.
> 
> Regarding AF, it is my suspicion that the R will have the fastest autofocus speed of all mirrorless cameras built to date, but still be slower than 5D4 and D850, and probably even slower than 6D2 in raw autofocus speed (I hope to be pleasantly surprised to the contrary regarding the latter). Certainly, the A7R3 and A9 are vastly inferior in time to acquire autofocus when compared to 5D4 and 1DX2's dedicated PDAF sensors.



Look, I am not against Canon anything. If so, would not get a 5DIV few months ago. When I read all those hands-on video comments on Youtube, I get kind of sick and bored from constant whinning. I do whine sometimes too, as naturally I would like to see Canon being at the top of the game in many areas and shut all those Sony nay sayers towards the Canon, but then suddenly am realising, that we did our business using 70D for last 5 years, so what.

So I narrowed it down to mostly a one feature, when considering EOS-R. The speed of AF. On one hand, we can see claims of the really fast AF, on the other hand, we can see a lowered FPS in focus mode. I have tried a 5DIV live-view focusing and it is not good enough imo to effectively track a semi-paced walking person (weddings). And out of focus photos are not useful even with 10x more dynamic range 

So, before we get next camera, it might not be this R one. Not yet. Maybe I will get some M5/6 II for an amusement, as I need to buy new toy each 2-3 years. Just hope my wife does not find this message


----------



## WilliamJ (Sep 10, 2018)

I’ll say what many people may be thinking. 

If EOS R is 5D IV equivelant, there’s no guarantee a ‘higher end’ camera such as 5DSR equivelant has dual card slots, and probably not any better video specs. 

And if canon continue the thinking of ‘high megapixel shooters don’t want or need video features’, we may even see worse video specs in a high megapixel body...


----------



## padam (Sep 10, 2018)

An RF 16-28mm f/2.8 zoom that was patented could be quite small indeed.
Of course the main question is: are they going to expand it upwards or downwards first with the next body?

Is DLO also embedded in video, or still not supported?


----------



## padam (Sep 10, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> Newly developed 5IDV like sensor? Why does not it utilise an electronic shutter, BSI and allow no crop 4K video then? I would say that they have just tweaked a 5DIV sensor to accomodate larger DPAF area and that's just it ...


It does have electronic shutter.


----------



## robotfist (Sep 10, 2018)

It's made to a market segment which I'm not in and neither are you it would seem?[/QUOTE]


-pekr- said:


> I would say that they have just tweaked a 5DIV sensor to accomodate larger DPAF area and that's just it ...



That’s what it really sounds like to me, too. We won’t know until the two cameras are put up against each other during some rigorous tests, but something certainly smells fishy with this “new sensor” claim.


----------



## robotfist (Sep 10, 2018)

A cinema version of the R would be amazing considering the video specs of the current release are terrible. And a “higher end” R with better specs would also put this camera over the top. But I’m really tired of waiting on Canon. These are all just the promises and whims of a CEO that has clearly lost touch with what professionals want in today’s age. That R cinema camera should be being announced right now if they wanted to stay ahead. By the time Canon announces a mirrorless cinema camera, the market will be saturated and people will be shooting 4k videos with nothing but contact lenses, lol.


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 10, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> I have tried a 5DIV live-view focusing and it is not good enough imo to effectively track a semi-paced walking person (weddings). And out of focus photos are not useful even with 10x more dynamic range



That’s not true. My 5DIV’s track focus on peoples’ faces while they walk swiftly. At weddings. 95+% of photos I Shoot this way with the 5DIV are in perfect focus. It’s so consistent.

EOS R is going to be amazing for AF. Just wait and see. I think it’s far closer to a 5DIV than a 6DII. 6DII is also an INCREDIBLE camera. Using one is just brilliant, as are the results it produces.


----------



## sdz (Sep 10, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> My personal prediction (and not that it matters) is, that the next R camera will introduce more of a new technology, especially in a sensor area. If we've got basically a 5DIV's sensor in a mid-range R, then I think Canon has something in its sleeves for a high-end model. A R-evolution.



I agree. Canon could use a modified 5D IV sensor in the EOS R because it had an advanced sensor in its back pocket. It would need better technology to best the 5D class sensor. Adding MPs to the R sensor would not work.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 10, 2018)

WilliamJ said:


> I’ll say what many people may be thinking.
> 
> If EOS R is 5D IV equivelant, there’s no guarantee a ‘higher end’ camera such as 5DSR equivelant has dual card slots, and probably not any better video specs.
> 
> And if canon continue the thinking of ‘high megapixel shooters don’t want or need video features’, we may even see worse video specs in a high megapixel body...


When has there ever been a “Guarantee “ from Canon on future product features. We are just extrapolating from past history or stating wish lists.


----------



## Josh Leavitt (Sep 10, 2018)

WilliamJ said:


> I’ll say what many people may be thinking.
> 
> If EOS R is 5D IV equivelant, there’s no guarantee a ‘higher end’ camera such as 5DSR equivelant has dual card slots, and probably not any better video specs.
> 
> And if canon continue the thinking of ‘high megapixel shooters don’t want or need video features’, we may even see worse video specs in a high megapixel body...



Yeah I was thinking about that as well. When Canon announced the EOS R I wasn't initially put off about the single card slot fiasco, because I believed at the time that EOS R was Canon's _entry-level _full-frame mirrorless camera. I assumed that EOS R was simply the 6D standard (single card slot as well) for Canon's mirrorless push into the market, and a very promising offering considering the higher MP count and AF capabilities over the Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6. 

But if Canon execs are reaffirming the DSLR product positioning for mirrorless by saying the EOS R is a 5D-series equivalent, and that we can expect a lower-end (6D-series) and higher-end (5DS(R)/1D X-series) in the future, then that's a serious setback for event and wedding photographers considering going into the system. Those genres of photography where tethering and wireless transfer backup isn't a feasible option has forced photographers to embrace redundant card slot capabilities. Apparently, only Sony and Fujifilm are the mirrorless system manufacturers who understand the needs of that market - and it's not a small market either.

I see a 6D EOS R equivalent camera with a single card slot as a forgivable exclusion, even though Sony _is_ including card redundancy in their entry-level mirrorless system. I cannot see the exclusion of dual card slots as being forgivable for a 5D level camera - that just defies all forms of logic in my opinion. Canon and Nikon refusing to offer data integrity/redundancy solutions in their product categories where Sony and Fuji are offering those capabilities is disturbing. But what I find more disturbing is that I'm able to achieve _*quintuple *_redundancy on my _smartphone_. Yes, my smartphone. A product that was never designed to primarily operate as a precision image capturing device is capable of storing my images and videos to: 1) the internal memory, 2) the external microSD media card, 3) my smartphone manufacturer cloud storage platform, 4) my Google Drive cloud storage platform, and 5) my paid subscription cloud storage platform. I get 5 methods of data redundancy on a general purpose device that cost me $300 whereas Canon are offering _no _redundancy on a precision image/video capture device that costs $2,300. I see a huge oversight in this, but maybe that's just me.


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 10, 2018)

Isn’t it possible to automatically send copies of photos to your smartphone via the Canon app? This can be done using the 5DIV. I shoot weddings professionally, yet I don’t give two hoots about dual card slots. I only use one at a time in my current 5DIV’s. Never lost a single photo in 400+ weddings. Amazing things happen when you buy and look after quality equipment. Remember the 5D and 5DII? They were wedding photographers’ main cameras for over a decade. How many card slots did they have?


----------



## tron (Sep 10, 2018)

Josh Leavitt said:


> Yeah I was thinking about that as well. When Canon announced the EOS R I wasn't initially put off about the single card slot fiasco, because I believed at the time that EOS R was Canon's _entry-level _full-frame mirrorless camera. I assumed that EOS R was simply the 6D standard (single card slot as well) for Canon's mirrorless push into the market, and a very promising offering considering the higher MP count and AF capabilities over the Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6.
> 
> But if Canon execs are reaffirming the DSLR product positioning for mirrorless by saying the EOS R is a 5D-series equivalent, and that we can expect a lower-end (6D-series) and higher-end (5DS(R)/1D X-series) in the future, then that's a serious setback for event and wedding photographers considering going into the system. Those genres of photography where tethering and wireless transfer backup isn't a feasible option has forced photographers to embrace redundant card slot capabilities. Apparently, only Sony and Fujifilm are the mirrorless system manufacturers who understand the needs of that market - and it's not a small market either.
> 
> I see a 6D EOS R equivalent camera with a single card slot as a forgivable exclusion, even though Sony _is_ including card redundancy in their entry-level mirrorless system. I cannot see the exclusion of dual card slots as being forgivable for a 5D level camera - that just defies all forms of logic in my opinion. Canon and Nikon refusing to offer data integrity/redundancy solutions in their product categories where Sony and Fuji are offering those capabilities is disturbing. But what I find more disturbing is that I'm able to achieve _*quintuple *_redundancy on my _smartphone_. Yes, my smartphone. A product that was never designed to primarily operate as a precision image capturing device is capable of storing my images and videos to: 1) the internal memory, 2) the external microSD media card, 3) my smartphone manufacturer cloud storage platform, 4) my Google Drive cloud storage platform, and 5) my paid subscription cloud storage platform. I get 5 methods of data redundancy on a general purpose device that cost me $300 whereas Canon are offering _no _redundancy on a precision image/video capture device that costs $2,300. I see a huge oversight in this, but maybe that's just me.


All this "redundancy" is achieved by manual operation AFTER the shooting and not at the same moment (mirroring). It can be acvieved equally manualy on EOS R. Having said that I am a 5D4 and 5DsR owner who enjoys them too much to switch to EOR R...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

miketcool said:


> Pulling the vignetting out from F/1.2 or F/2 lenses live in the EVF is a big deal. It’s one of the advantages of having a screen to look through.




I can see the in-VF histogram, etc., being a big deal. But removing a couple stops of vignetting? Doesn’t seem impactful, unless the problem is severely magnified by the VF being compressed to 8-bit, but I doubt that’s the case.


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 10, 2018)

sdz said:


> I agree. Canon could use a modified 5D IV sensor in the EOS R because it had an advanced sensor in its back pocket. It would need better technology to best the 5D class sensor. Adding MPs to the R sensor would not work.



Launching a €2500 mirrorless cameras with a derivative of the 5DIV's sensor, which is the cause of most of the R's controversial specifications, doesn't make me feel that they've got much better in store. This is the second time Canon seems to display a difficulty to manufacture FF sensors with a certain degree of performances for a given manufacturing cost (6DII). 
It took Sony several years of iterative developments, most often starting with smaller sensor sizes, to go from the readout speed of Canon's current sensors, to where they're at now (A7III, A9, XT3 sensor, etc.). I don't think that we'll see Canon pulling a miracle. 
A realistic expectation for the short term (2019, maybe even 2020) is that we may see either a mirrorless 5DS(R) with DPAF, with very slooooow fps in continuous drive with AF, and no 4K (but no pixel stripping, yeah !), and / or a camera matching the A7III's sensor readout speed, at a minimum of $4000 (of course with a completely different - and much better in most ways - body design). Anything else and you're likely to be disappointed. Stuff like the A9 or even the XT3 sensor are years away. 
I would expect quite a few video-centric cameras as well, and sooner rather than later.


----------



## sdz (Sep 10, 2018)

Josh Leavitt said:


> Yeah I was thinking about that as well. When Canon announced the EOS R I wasn't initially put off about the single card slot fiasco, because I believed at the time that EOS R was Canon's _entry-level _full-frame mirrorless camera. I assumed that EOS R was simply the 6D standard (single card slot as well) for Canon's mirrorless push into the market, and a very promising offering considering the higher MP count and AF capabilities over the Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6.
> 
> But if Canon execs are reaffirming the DSLR product positioning for mirrorless by saying the EOS R is a 5D-series equivalent, and that we can expect a lower-end (6D-series) and higher-end (5DS(R)/1D X-series) in the future, then that's a serious setback for event and wedding photographers considering going into the system. Those genres of photography where tethering and wireless transfer backup isn't a feasible option has forced photographers to embrace redundant card slot capabilities. Apparently, only Sony and Fujifilm are the mirrorless system manufacturers who understand the needs of that market - and it's not a small market either.
> 
> I see a 6D EOS R equivalent camera with a single card slot as a forgivable exclusion, even though Sony _is_ including card redundancy in their entry-level mirrorless system. I cannot see the exclusion of dual card slots as being forgivable for a 5D level camera - that just defies all forms of logic in my opinion. Canon and Nikon refusing to offer data integrity/redundancy solutions in their product categories where Sony and Fuji are offering those capabilities is disturbing. But what I find more disturbing is that I'm able to achieve _*quintuple *_redundancy on my _smartphone_. Yes, my smartphone. A product that was never designed to primarily operate as a precision image capturing device is capable of storing my images and videos to: 1) the internal memory, 2) the external microSD media card, 3) my smartphone manufacturer cloud storage platform, 4) my Google Drive cloud storage platform, and 5) my paid subscription cloud storage platform. I get 5 methods of data redundancy on a general purpose device that cost me $300 whereas Canon are offering _no _redundancy on a precision image/video capture device that costs $2,300. I see a huge oversight in this, but maybe that's just me.



I believe the better method to use when discussing these cameras is to peg the technology used to pricepoints, not mirrored camera specs. Canon gave the R a 6D like price. The fact that the R performs nearly to the level of performance found I the 5D IV tells the market that that's the kind and degree of performance one can expect from a $2,300 camera. The market can expect more from the $3,500 and $6,500 cameras.


----------



## miketcool (Sep 10, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> That’s not true. My 5DIV’s track focus on peoples’ faces while they walk swiftly. At weddings. 95+% of photos I Shoot this way with the 5DIV are in perfect focus. It’s so consistent.



Not only is it fast and accurate, the focus racks smoothly and does not search. This is a feature that is still subpar on other camera platforms. The trick is to set your AF to the correct settings for movement before shooting. I've yet to see a demonstration on another platform that lets you tap the screen to smoothly transition from a foreground element to a background element.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 10, 2018)

Josh Leavitt said:


> But if Canon execs are reaffirming the DSLR product positioning for mirrorless by saying the EOS R is a 5D-series equivalent, and that we can expect a lower-end (6D-series) and higher-end (5DS(R)/1D X-series) in the future, then that's a serious setback for event and wedding photographers considering going into the system.



I don't follow your logic on it being a 'serious setback'. Whether Canon are calling this an equivalent to their 5DIV (are they?) then that still does not say they will not have dual card slots in the higher model. 



Josh Leavitt said:


> Apparently, only Sony and Fujifilm are the mirrorless system manufacturers who understand the needs of that market - and it's not a small market either.



And Panasonic, and Olympus....



Josh Leavitt said:


> Canon and Nikon refusing to offer data integrity/redundancy solutions in their product categories where Sony and Fuji are offering those capabilities is disturbing.


It would be interesting to find out what feedback Canon/Nikon have received for them to omit dual cards - Thom Hogan wrote that the obsession with dual-card is very much a Western Europe/US thing and it is nowhere near the same deal in Asia. My guess is that they intend the EOS R to be a second camera rather than a pro's main camera.



Josh Leavitt said:


> But what I find more disturbing is that I'm able to achieve _*quintuple *_redundancy on my _smartphone_. Yes, my smartphone. A product that was never designed to primarily operate as a precision image capturing device is capable of storing my images and videos to: 1) the internal memory, 2) the external microSD media card, 3) my smartphone manufacturer cloud storage platform, 4) my Google Drive cloud storage platform, and 5) my paid subscription cloud storage platform. I get 5 methods of data redundancy on a general purpose device that cost me $300 whereas Canon are offering _no _redundancy on a precision image/video capture device that costs $2,300. I see a huge oversight in this, but maybe that's just me.



That is because phones have a connectivity that no (repeat NO) camera manufacture has built in yet - which suggests there are serious technical issues to overcome. So being 'disturbed' about something that apparently is not possible seems rather....over-sensitive to me.

So you have a choice - quality photos with single back-up or phone with 5 back-ups. Care to photograph a wedding with a phone and tell the bride 'don;t worry, I have got 5 copies'  ?
FYI - you have named 4 levels of redundancy, not 5


----------



## Kit. (Sep 10, 2018)

MayaTlab said:


> Launching a €2500 mirrorless cameras with a derivative of the 5DIV's sensor, which is the cause of most of the R's controversial specifications, doesn't make me feel that they've got much better in store.


If they had nothing better in the store, it would be a €3600 camera.



MayaTlab said:


> to go from the readout speed of Canon's current sensors,


I think you are underestimating (by a factor of two, as in "dial pixel") the readout speeds of 2 years old Canon sensors.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> In one of Rudy Winston's videos he talked about DLO then said it affected RAW only but baked the DLO settings into the raw where they will be read
> by the DPP software.


Exactly. It’s like HTP.


----------



## miketcool (Sep 10, 2018)

MayaTlab said:


> Launching a €2500 mirrorless cameras with a derivative of the 5DIV's sensor, which is the cause of most of the R's controversial specifications, doesn't make me feel that they've got much better in store. This is the second time Canon seems to display a difficulty to manufacture FF sensors with a certain degree of performances for a given manufacturing cost (6DII).
> It took Sony several years of iterative developments, most often starting with smaller sensor sizes, to go from the readout speed of Canon's current sensors, to where they're at now (A7III, A9, XT3 sensor, etc.). I don't think that we'll see Canon pulling a miracle.
> A realistic expectation for the short term (2019, maybe even 2020) is that we may see either a mirrorless 5DS(R) with DPAF, with very slooooow fps in continuous drive with AF, and no 4K (but no pixel stripping, yeah !), and / or a camera matching the A7III's sensor readout speed, at a minimum of $4000 (of course with a completely different - and much better in most ways - body design). Anything else and you're likely to be disappointed. Stuff like the A9 or even the XT3 sensor are years away.
> I would expect quite a few video-centric cameras as well, and sooner rather than later.



Canon and Sony approached autofocus from two completely different points of view. It will take Canon's route longer to pay off, but it is the future.

Sony doubled the amount of processing power their sensors could handle, allowing for faster data output and faster autofocus. Their hybrid AF is essentially pulling twice the data from focus points using a stacked sensor with double the output. This is why the A9 is a beast at continual AF and FPS shots.

Canon created a new AF system called Dual Pixel Auto Focus. It essentially doubles the amount of data but outputs at the same speed to the sensor. This is one of the big reasons DPAF sensors have a data and heat limitation for video and high FPS shots. However, the advantage to using a split pixel detecting distance in parallax is the ability to detect the range of out-of-focus objects while focusing on an object. *By being able to detect the range of objects in a shot, Canon is able to smoothly move between points.* This is the biggest advantage of DPAF and it is helping their Cine EOS line by giving filmmakers the ability rack focus smoothly using autofocus.

When Sony or Nikon racks focus it has to hunt for a moment to find the depth of objects as it goes from one in-focus point to the next. This is a different scenario than capturing a moving object and tracking. This is moving from one extreme foreground element to a background element. Hybrid AF does not have the ability to know the depth between objects until it switches focal points. DPAF is able to see ranges within the shot which is why is glides effortlessly between points.

They're different approaches and they speak to the different strengths for each company. As production teams get smaller and smaller, systems like DPAF will be helping filmmakers and journalists capture cinematic quality moments without the need for additional equipment in the field. Sony will be hitting a wall for speed of glass soon that both Nikon and Canon have leapt past with their wider flange size. Perhaps they'll go the route and create a full professional medium format mirrorless to compete with Hasselblad and Phase One. Either way, we are close to another revolutionary leap forward in photography technology.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> My 5DIV’s track focus on peoples’ faces while they walk swiftly. At weddings. 95+% of photos I Shoot this way with the 5DIV are in perfect focus. It’s so consistent.


So DPAF is great for sports! If you’re Tony Northrup...
(Not really a comment on your post, just that your statement put me in mind of a TN ‘infotainment/commercial’ —the first...and last...TN video I ever watched— where he compared the ‘sports performance’ of the D800 and 5DIII and concluded that the D800 was much better for sports; sports in his contex was his subject/wife walking towards him.)


----------



## miketcool (Sep 10, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I can see the in-VF histogram, etc., being a big deal. But removing a couple stops of vignetting? Doesn’t seem impactful, unless the problem is severely magnified by the VF being compressed to 8-bit, but I doubt that’s the case.



It's more along the lines of, you can see the full completed photo live. The Digic 8 processor renders out a live image for you to look through and compose. This opens the door to other creative additions, like live HDR viewing, live double exposure composing (I don't mean just a gimmicky overlay), and live image preset view. It has the ability to expand functionality going forward while also removing one more step from your workflow. This feature could have huge implications in a studio setting where a client sees a near complete and color adjusted image live on a tethered display all done on the camera.


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 10, 2018)

miketcool said:


> Canon and Sony approached autofocus from two completely different points of view. It will take Canon's route longer to pay off, but it is the future.



I don't think that anyone will disagree with this. Canon selling video cameras with low mp count most likely explain why they invested in DPAF even at the opportunity cost of not investing elsewhere. In that application it's just better. 

That said, the idea that cameras using masked PDAF point necessarily hunt in video just no longer stack up to reality. Smooth AF pulls are possible with other cameras than Canon. 

A more direct negative consequence of masked pixels is the phenomenon that's been called "pixel stripping", but even it can vary widely depending on implementation. 

And finally issues with interpolation - again most likely what drove Canon towards DPAF as video sensors with low mp counts may suffer more from this. 

I'm wondering if 8K may or may not produce a convergence of technologies, as we'll need both for video and photo a lot of pixels, quickly read.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

miketcool said:


> It's more along the lines of, you can see the full completed photo live. The Digic 8 processor renders out a live image for you to look through and compose. This opens the door to other creative additions, like live HDR viewing, live double exposure composing (I don't mean just a gimmicky overlay), and live image preset view. It has the ability to expand functionality going forward while also removing one more step from your workflow. This feature could have huge implications in a studio setting where a client sees a near complete and color adjusted image live on a tethered display all done on the camera.


Yes, all that is interesting and potentially feasible. But all of that is _implied_...none of that explains how, “Pulling the vignetting out from F/1.2 or F/2 lenses live in the EVF is a big deal.” Probably you chose not to address that because you realize that it’s not really a big deal at all.


----------



## miketcool (Sep 10, 2018)

MayaTlab said:


> I'm wondering if 8K may or may not produce a convergence of technologies, as we'll need both for video and photo a lot of pixels, quickly read.



The ability to output this information is a few years away. The difference between cine bodies and stills bodies will have more to do with the amount of color information, not just the density of the sensor data. Look at the RED Monster which is getting 17+ steps of dynamic range while shooting insane color depth at 8K between 60--75fps. I don't expect stills cameras to reach that level, but a lower color data output of 8bit at 29.97 is possible in the next 5 years at 6-8K.

The thing I am constantly reminding people about is that 4K is overkill 99% of hobby shooters. It requires much larger file storage, faster computing, faster editing, and time demands to render. It's a royal pain in my ass when most of the content viewed on the web or tv is still in 1080p. Even to get the advantages of full 4K 10bit output, you need an external recording device with SSD blades. That setup can easily cost more than the camera.



neuroanatomist said:


> Yes, all that is interesting and potentially feasible. But all of that is _implied_...none of that explains how, “Pulling the vignetting out from F/1.2 or F/2 lenses live in the EVF is a big deal.” Probably you chose not to address that because you realize that it’s not really a big deal at all.



It is a big deal dependent on the application and the shooter. It's probably not a big deal for the point-and-shoot hobbyist. It is a big deal when composing landscape shots for fine art and in a studio, especially when working with clients. We are getting to a point where the workflow will be achieved in camera, allowing us to cut down our post-work. If this happens live, even better. No more looking at the viewfinder on the back to see how the shot came out AND no more battery loss to having that damn preview screen on when I can do nearly everything in the EVF.


----------



## bks54 (Sep 10, 2018)

EOS R, is it positively an EOS 5D class camera?
Mr. Kiyota : I believe so. (Google Translated)

This is like a Rorschach test. Note that the question referred to "5D class". Not 5DIV or anything else. Depending on your psychological state, you could interpret this to mean that a Canon spokesman considers the R to be a 5DIV equivalent camera (which is ridiculous, because it is not), or an enthusiast level FF camera, or something else altogether. Trying to divine what features Canon will include in future EOS R cameras is a fun exercise, but Canon is not telling us anything that will be helpful to getting that guess right. The same goes for trying to predict lens releases from a presentation slide that is absolutely devoid of any real information. Canon does not do roadmaps.


----------



## Treyarnon (Sep 10, 2018)

Josh Leavitt said:


> Yeah I was thinking about that as well. When Canon announced the EOS R I wasn't initially put off about the single card slot fiasco, because I believed at the time that EOS R was Canon's _entry-level _full-frame mirrorless camera. I assumed that EOS R was simply the 6D standard (single card slot as well) for Canon's mirrorless push into the market, and a very promising offering considering the higher MP count and AF capabilities over the Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6.
> 
> But if Canon execs are reaffirming the DSLR product positioning for mirrorless by saying the EOS R is a 5D-series equivalent, and that we can expect a lower-end (6D-series) and higher-end (5DS(R)/1D X-series) in the future, then that's a serious setback for event and wedding photographers considering going into the system. Those genres of photography where tethering and wireless transfer backup isn't a feasible option has forced photographers to embrace redundant card slot capabilities. Apparently, only Sony and Fujifilm are the mirrorless system manufacturers who understand the needs of that market - and it's not a small market either.
> 
> I see a 6D EOS R equivalent camera with a single card slot as a forgivable exclusion, even though Sony _is_ including card redundancy in their entry-level mirrorless system. I cannot see the exclusion of dual card slots as being forgivable for a 5D level camera - that just defies all forms of logic in my opinion. .



That interview comes across as very marketing orientated - so the language should perhaps be taken with a pinch of salt.

When the features, build and price of the R are taken into account - the camera fits right into that '6D' market segment. 
However, given the 5D4 sensor - it not surprising that the marketing department are selling the R as 'like a 5D4'


----------



## melgross (Sep 10, 2018)

amorse said:


> This really seems out of place to me. The portion where they mention that the EOS R is a 5D IV level camera doesn't fit in my mind. The 5D IV seems like the superior camera to me, and there's a considerable price differential between then. The EOS R seems more like a ramped up 6D II in my mind. Maybe that's splitting hairs to be fair.
> 
> I like that they're planning on building higher and lower level models, and the fact that they specifically mention high resolution bodies is encouraging for a 5D SR equivalent body. But if the EOS R is a 5D IV level camera, will the 5DSR equivalent just be an EOS R with a different sensor? I guess we'll find out.


Well, this is Google ?Translate, which is terrible translating grammar, among other things.

Possibly he meant that it was 5Dmk IV image quality, not camera features.


----------



## Karlbug (Sep 10, 2018)

In one of the Canon's promo videos there are several RF-looking lenses. They may very well be dummies (and probably are!), but they kind of make sense and match the mentioned f/2.8 and rumored f/2 zooms as well as some expected primes.


----------



## msamiullah (Sep 10, 2018)

they need to stop bitching about 8K, I mean first get 4K right. This interview is all BS, just giving us hopes about future and nothing to deliver at the present.


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 10, 2018)

Kit. said:


> The thing I am constantly reminding people about is that 4K is overkill 99% of hobby shooters. It requires much larger file storage, faster computing, faster editing, and time demands to render. It's a royal pain in my ass when most of the content viewed on the web or tv is still in 1080p. Even to get the advantages of full 4K 10bit output, you need an external recording device with SSD blades. That setup can easily cost more than the camera.



Agreed. But this isn't just about 4K. It's about fps with AF. It's about bit depth in continuous mode. It's about getting a liveview feed in between frames. It's about getting a silent shutter with a sufficiently fast scan time. Readout speed isn't just to provide FF 4K. With mirrorless cameras, it's also an operational benefit. 
Personally I couldn't care less for 4K video at the moment. But I do care when I don't get a liveview feed in continuous mode (I find that far more problematic than 1fps more or less or a slightly dodgy AF), and I find silent shutters with a fast enough scan time awfully tempting.


----------



## Josh Leavitt (Sep 10, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> I don't follow your logic on it being a 'serious setback'. Whether Canon are calling this an equivalent to their 5DIV (are they?) then that still does not say they will not have dual card slots in the higher model.



My implication was that the EOS R was a 5DIV-equivalent in the form of mirrorless, and therefore, would be expected to have dual card slots as the 5D IV currently possesses.



Mikehit said:


> And Panasonic, and Olympus....



Very true - my mistake



Mikehit said:


> It would be interesting to find out what feedback Canon/Nikon have received for them to omit dual cards - Thom Hogan wrote that the obsession with dual-card is very much a Western Europe/US thing and it is nowhere near the same deal in Asia. My guess is that they intend the EOS R to be a second camera rather than a pro's main camera.



That must be the case. But given the level of disdain many Canikon DSLR users dished out to Sony users prior to the release of the A7R III, A9, and A7 III regarding single card slots, my expectation is that Canon could have anticipated the backlash. The feedback in western media is relatively universal - a single card slot in a camera, whether entry-level or professional-level, is a design flaw at this point. I've heard many reviewers and photographers say a single card slot isn't the end of the world, but none of them said it was a good idea - two us always better than one.



Mikehit said:


> That is because phones have a connectivity that no (repeat NO) camera manufacture has built in yet - which suggests there are serious technical issues to overcome. So being 'disturbed' about something that apparently is not possible seems rather....over-sensitive to me.



Cameras for many years have come equipped with WiFi and bluetooth. Many of them can stream JPEGs to a smartphone wirelessly via an app, but I haven't heard of one that streams them automatically after the shutter button is pressed, and sends the RAW image files in the process. Maybe one exists, but Canon Camera Connect only sends JPEG as far as I know. A camera doesn't need a cellular antenna to achieve cloud redundancy, it just needs an option to allow for a constant synchronous connection to a close smartphone that can in turn perform those operations once the transfer to the phone is complete. 



Mikehit said:


> So you have a choice - quality photos with single back-up or phone with 5 back-ups. Care to photograph a wedding with a phone and tell the bride 'don;t worry, I have got 5 copies'  ?
> FYI - you have named 4 levels of redundancy, not 5



Or more accurately... Quality photos with another camera brand offering a similar product, at a similar price, with redundant backup capabilities. My phone analogy was exactly that, an analogy. Good catch on the redundancy levels though.


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 10, 2018)

Well, it's certainly a 5DIV level of camera concerning video capability, plus a fully articulating screen.


----------



## Bjorn Holmsen (Sep 10, 2018)

nitram said:


> What is the meaning of the F 2.8L text? The line immediately below my screenshot translates to 'scheduled release.'
> 
> View attachment 180301


gdh


nitram said:


> What is the meaning of the F 2.8L text? The line immediately below my screenshot translates to 'scheduled release.'
> 
> View attachment 180301


It says 2.8L zooms etc


----------



## fullstop (Sep 10, 2018)

bks54 said:


> Canon does not do roadmaps.



as long as we dont vehemently demand them. and as long as stupid journalists do not explicitly ask for real information in every interview with Canon exec muppets.


----------



## melgross (Sep 10, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> I don't follow your logic on it being a 'serious setback'. Whether Canon are calling this an equivalent to their 5DIV (are they?) then that still does not say they will not have dual card slots in the higher model.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It isn’t so much technical issues as financial ones. It costs $130 to add both GPS and LTE to an iPad. Likely, something like that would be true for a camera. And where to put the antenna in an all metal body? But the biggest problem is that carriers would charge a monthly fee for LTE service, just as they do for my iPad, and Watch. How many people are willing to pay for the extra circuitry AND a monthly fee for something they won’t use all that much?

Not very many.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 10, 2018)

EOS R clearly is a 6D class camera. Otherwise it would be priced higher than 5D IV. entire interview is just a joke. void of any information, 100% marketing BS, like any time one of the canon muppets is "interviewed".


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 10, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Well, it's certainly a 5DIV level of camera concerning video capability, plus a fully articulating screen.



If only for the codecs / new Digic / C-log without paying an extra / new features such as focus assist, it's better actually. That said things have moved on and the 5DIV's level of video capability may not cut it for everyone at the R's price.


----------



## melgross (Sep 10, 2018)

miketcool said:


> Canon and Sony approached autofocus from two completely different points of view. It will take Canon's route longer to pay off, but it is the future.
> 
> Sony doubled the amount of processing power their sensors could handle, allowing for faster data output and faster autofocus. Their hybrid AF is essentially pulling twice the data from focus points using a stacked sensor with double the output. This is why the A9 is a beast at continual AF and FPS shots.
> 
> ...


Umm, here’s the unlikely scenario of medium format again. Why this is a wish, I’ve never understood. There are three basic companies doing that now. These cameras sell in the thousands a year, not even the tens of thousands that Canon and Nikon would require. Every time Canon has another tilt/shift lens that needs to cover 2 1/4 to work on 35, the rumors start up again.


----------



## melgross (Sep 10, 2018)

MayaTlab said:


> If only for the codecs / new Digic / C-log without paying an extra / new features such as focus assist, it's better actually. That said things have moved on and the 5DIV's level of video capability may not cut it for everyone at the R's price.


The word “everyone” is the ringer. Sure, not everyone. But I see too much concern for this. I still contend that this is a feature that a small percentage of buyers will use.


----------



## Kit. (Sep 10, 2018)

melgross said:


> It isn’t so much technical issues as financial ones. It costs $130 to add both GPS and LTE to an iPad. Likely, something like that would be true for a camera.


I think you can buy a LTE+GPS USB dongle on Alibaba for about $25.


----------



## miketcool (Sep 10, 2018)

melgross said:


> Umm, here’s the unlikely scenario of medium format again. Why this is a wish, I’ve never understood. There are three basic companies doing that now. These cameras sell in the thousands a year, not even the tens of thousands that Canon and Nikon would require. Every time Canon has another tilt/shift lens that needs to cover 2 1/4 to work on 35, the rumors start up again.



It's not a wish and it's not likely to happen for another 5 or so years. There are many technical limitations right now as to why those are not mainstream. There are limitations to pixel density at 35mm, speed, data, heat, AF, mass production, etc. There will be at some point, a shift to larger sensor sizes as cameras become more intelligent and faster at processing.

75% of my work is done on 35mm digital. 25% is done on smaller sensor size. I'll do one project this year on a Hasselblad. Medium and large format digital is a niche for now, but will likely become more available to the masses within the next decade.


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 10, 2018)

MayaTlab said:


> If only for the codecs / new Digic / C-log without paying an extra / new features such as focus assist, it's better actually. That said things have moved on and the 5DIV's level of video capability may not cut it for everyone at the R's price.



I concur- it's actually an improvement, but these video features are things the 5DIV should have had to start with and thus amount to baby steps. 

If the EOS-R had FF 4K and 60p I'd buy it in a heartbeat AND invest in the new lenses and adapters, but without any confidence that they'll implement those features in the future, no thanks- I'll stay away from this first gen product and see where the line goes.


----------



## melgross (Sep 10, 2018)

Kit. said:


> I think you can buy a LTE+GPS USB dongle on Alibaba for about $25.


You think? Where does it work? Does it work? And even if it does, it needs to be recognized by the carriers. They won’t allow just anything, they have to specifically support it. It’s unlikely they will support some generic Chinese dongle.

I couldn’t use my Watch until they supported it a week after I bought mine. It’s not so simple.


----------



## melgross (Sep 10, 2018)

miketcool said:


> It's not a wish and it's not likely to happen for another 5 or so years. There are many technical limitations right now as to why those are not mainstream. There are limitations to pixel density at 35mm, speed, data, heat, AF, mass production, etc. There will be at some point, a shift to larger sensor sizes as cameras become more intelligent and faster at processing.
> 
> 75% of my work is done on 35mm digital. 25% is done on smaller sensor size. I'll do one project this year on a Hasselblad. Medium and large format digital is a niche for now, but will likely become more available to the masses within the next decade.



It’s not likely to happen, period. North light still has that third party knock up of a supposed Canon medium format on its page from years ago when people were expecting it.

These cameras aren’t mainstream because they are bigger, heavier and much more expensive. Nothing technological will change that. And the fairly new Hasselblad and Fuji models aren’t even really medium format, even though they’re being called that. They are actually closer in image sensor area to FF 35 than they are to the half medium frame 645, which I’ve always thought of as an intermediary sized format. Not really medium format either as digital, but using 120 and 220 film back in the day, so called medium format half frame.


----------



## nchoh (Sep 10, 2018)

-pekr- said:


> Newly developed 5IDV like sensor? Why does not it utilise an electronic shutter, BSI and allow no crop 4K video then? I would say that they have just tweaked a 5DIV sensor to accomodate larger DPAF area and that's just it ...



The micro lenses have to be "adjusted" to work with the smaller flange distance.


robotfist said:


> It's made to a market segment which I'm not in and neither are you it would seem?




That’s what it really sounds like to me, too. We won’t know until the two cameras are put up against each other during some rigorous tests, but something certainly smells fishy with this “new sensor” claim.[/QUOTE]

Nothing fishy with the new sensor claim. They said that the micro mirrors were changed to fit the shorter flange distance.


----------



## Kit. (Sep 10, 2018)

melgross said:


> You think? Where does it work? Does it work?


I think, it's highly likely. Anyway, it shows the level of BoM prices involved.



melgross said:


> And even if it does, it needs to be recognized by the carriers. They won’t allow just anything, they have to specifically support it. It’s unlikely they will support some generic Chinese dongle.
> 
> I couldn’t use my Watch until they supported it a week after I bought mine. It’s not so simple.


Never had such a problem. That's probably because of the eSIM in your watch. I see no reason for camera manufacturers not to use normal physical SIMs.


----------



## melgross (Sep 10, 2018)

Kit. said:


> I think, it's highly likely. Anyway, it shows the level of BoM prices involved.
> 
> 
> Never had such a problem. That's probably because of the eSIM in your watch. I see no reason for camera manufacturers not to use normal physical SIMs.


No. The same thing it true of tablets using regular sims. If they decide to not support the product, they won’t.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 10, 2018)

miketcool said:


> > Pulling the vignetting out from F/1.2 or F/2 lenses live in the EVF is a big deal.”
> 
> 
> It is a big deal dependent on the application and the shooter. It's probably not a big deal for the point-and-shoot hobbyist. It is a big deal when composing landscape shots for fine art and in a studio, especially when working with clients.


The fact that you think it's such a big deal indicates you must shoot a lot of fine art landscapes at f/1.2 or f/2, and do a lot of studio shooting with your subjects in a corner of the frame. Do you believe those are typical use cases? 

Feel free to beat the dead horse some more, I suspect most rational people would agree that correcting vignetting in the EVF is not really a big deal (particularly when one of the touted advantages of an EVF is continuous DoF preview, where the narrower apertures typically used for landscape and studio photography already mitigate any vignetting).


----------



## brad-man (Sep 10, 2018)

fullstop said:


> EOS R clearly is a 6D class camera. Otherwise it would be priced higher than 5D IV. entire interview is just a joke. void of any information, 100% marketing BS, like any time one of the canon muppets is "interviewed".


I have a 6D, and while I have not yet used an EOS-R, I can assure you that the R has a superior and higher resolution sensor and a way better AF system. I'm sure it has many other enhancements that I am not aware of since I am not going to replace my 5DIV anytime soon. It's not a "6D class" camera. Is it a "5D class" camera? I don't know, it hasn't been released yet. I'm just relieved that the M series appears to be an ongoing concern...


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 10, 2018)

Sony Rumours site is having a poll on what functions from the Z6/Z7/EOS-R they would like to see in the next A series.
Now there's a turn up for the books


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 10, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Sony Rumours site is having a poll on what functions from the Z6/Z7/EOS-R they would like to see in the next A series.
> Now there's a turn up for the books


<START TROLLING>
Sony should have DPAF. I want it so bad. Come on it is 2018. I know Sony is intentionally crippling auto focus spec to protect their Venice video line. Otherwise, I'm going to switch to Canon!!
<END TROLLING>


----------



## Kit. (Sep 10, 2018)

melgross said:


> No. The same thing it true of tablets using regular sims. If they decide to not support the product, they won’t.


There is an even more interesting solution: M.2 NGFF interface slot like the notebooks have for their RF modules. So, people could buy network operator-certified M.2 LTE modems like Huawei ME906V - and replace them with something faster and/or more compatible with the current network operator any time they want.


----------



## aa_angus (Sep 10, 2018)

melgross said:


> No. The same thing it true of tablets using regular sims. If they decide to not support the product, they won’t.



Why wouldn’t cameras just continue to use Bluetooth or wifi to transfer files straight to our phones?


----------



## fullstop (Sep 11, 2018)

brad-man said:


> I have a 6D, and while I have not yet used an EOS-R, I can assure you that the R has a superior and higher resolution sensor and a way better AF system. I'm sure it has many other enhancements that I am not aware of since I am not going to replace my 5DIV anytime soon. It's not a "6D class" camera. Is it a "5D class" camera? I don't know, it hasn't been released yet. I'm just relieved that the M series appears to be an ongoing concern...



EOS R is exactly what 6D III should have been. An old 5D IV sensor does not make it a 5D class camera. Not by a long way. 3 fps tracking AF. A bad joke in 2018.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 11, 2018)

fullstop said:


> . An old 5D IV sensor does not make it a 5D class camera.



Your desire to criticise Canon really does make you unable to read. Canon say this is an adapted 5DIV sensor, so whichever way you look at it is is a new sensor.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Sep 11, 2018)

Might be a different sensor, but ti still has the same DR, still has the same slow readout speed which is why the DPAF is too slow to do more than 3fps tracking. Approximately 1/8s for a mirrorless sensor is pretty poor and Canon should have known readout speed is of paramount importance for mirrorless. To not even offer BSI, when they have the patents is poor form. Unless they get all new sensor tech in place for their higher end models, they'll struggle enormously and yet again just rely on glass.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 11, 2018)

Mr Majestyk said:


> Unless they get all new sensor tech in place for their higher end models, they'll struggle enormously and yet again just rely on glass.


True...as long as you define 'struggle' as selling more ILCs than any other manufacturer. That's not how most people define it, but whatever floats your boat.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 11, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Your desire to criticise Canon really does make you unable to read. Canon say this is an adapted 5DIV sensor, so whichever way you look at it is is a new sensor.



yes, they sell newly made sensors, not used ones. Other than that nothing "new" about that 5D IV sensor. They just slapped slightly different micro-lenses on it it to match RF mount geometry. That's really all they did. No BSI, no improved readout speed, zilcho.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 11, 2018)

I'd just love to see some production of some gizmo from the various whiners on CR. Perhaps I'm wrong and they are actually genius designers. I've completed numerous projects and know how challenging various aspects of design can be - guess that's why I'm more accommodating of Canon's efforts. I also know that steady towards a goal that is well thought out is far better than hurry up mode. So Canon had to lean on a sensor they had to get this to market ASAP; well, that's life.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 11, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> I'd just love to see some production of some gizmo from the various whiners on CR. Perhaps I'm wrong and they are actually genius designers. I've completed numerous projects and know how challenging various aspects of design can be - guess that's why I'm more accommodating of Canon's efforts. I also know that steady towards a goal that is well thought out is far better than hurry up mode. So Canon had to lean on a sensor they had to get this to market ASAP; well, that's life.
> 
> Jack


Critics of films, music, plays etc rarely have the ability to direct films, write music or plays etc, but it doesn't stop them from being good critics. So, do you really think you have to be a designer genius to criticise design?


----------



## -pekr- (Sep 11, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Your desire to criticise Canon really does make you unable to read. Canon say this is an adapted 5DIV sensor, so whichever way you look at it is is a new sensor.



A wishful thinking, yes. Camera produced in September is all new to the one produced in June too


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 11, 2018)

So this article indicates more EOS-R cameras are coming shortly. I believe they have the higher MP camera already and are holding it until next spring


----------



## fullstop (Sep 11, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> So this article indicates more EOS-R cameras are coming shortly. I believe they have the higher MP camera already and are holding it until next spring



my impression is more Canon could not finish the better model ("5D class", A7 III / Z7 competitor) in time to counter Nikon's launch. So they just went ahead with the lower model - "6D class" / Z6 competitor EOS R.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 11, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Critics of films, music, plays etc rarely have the ability to direct films, write music or plays etc, but it doesn't stop them from being good critics. So, do you really think you have to be a designer genius to criticise design?



That is somewhat different. If people were saying 'this camera would better with IBIS' then that is analagous to film critique. But what people are doing here is criticising Canon's decisions on design based on their assumptions of what Canon is capable of and all-too-common cliche that Canon are deliberately crippling their cameras (when has a director deliberately crippled their films?) with no thought to the technical issues involved.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 11, 2018)

fullstop said:


> my impression is more Canon could not finish the better model ("5D class", A7 III / Z7 competitor) in time to counter Nikon's launch. So they just went ahead with the lower model - "6D class" / Z6 competitor EOS R.


So Canon set in train a 5 year development program knowing Nikon would do that om September 2018?


----------



## fullstop (Sep 11, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> So Canon set in train a 5 year development program knowing Nikon would do that om September 2018?



nope. Canon could not finish their x-year development program in time, when Nikon launched. All they could do when they learned what/when Nikon would launch was to just barely finish the 6D III-ish EOS R with re-used 5D IV sensor, lame tracking AF and poor video implementation due to that old sensor's readout limitations.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 11, 2018)

fullstop said:


> nope. Canon could not finish their x-year development program in time, when Nikon launched. All they could do when they learned what/when Nikon would launch was to just barely finish the 6D III-ish EOS R with re-used 5D IV sensor, lame tracking AF and poor video implementation due to that old sensor's readout limitations.



Who is to say Nikon's launch was not hurried because of what they learned about Canon  Canon came out with a decent set of lenses so it all seems better coordinated


----------



## syyeung1 (Sep 11, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Critics of films, music, plays etc rarely have the ability to direct films, write music or plays etc, but it doesn't stop them from being good critics. So, do you really think you have to be a designer genius to criticise design?



Music and films are end products, Cameras are not. I don't think many would be interested to comment of the instruments musicians use, unless of course there is something wrong with the end product due to the tools they use


----------



## syyeung1 (Sep 11, 2018)

fullstop said:


> nope. Canon could not finish their x-year development program in time, when Nikon launched. All they could do when they learned what/when Nikon would launch was to just barely finish the 6D III-ish EOS R with re-used 5D IV sensor, lame tracking AF and poor video implementation due to that old sensor's readout limitations.



Products will start shipping next month. They had started production of it BEFORE Nikon's announcement. So they must have finalized the spec before that.


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 11, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> So Canon set in train a 5 year development program knowing Nikon would do that om September 2018?



It probably doesn't take 5 years to make a camera like the R _pers se_. It's the culmination of years of development (in a _very interesting _PDF linked here Canon mentions that they envisioned DPAF in the late 90s : https://d25tv1xepz39hi.cloudfront.net/2018-09-05/files/EOS_R_An_Interview_with_the_Developers_.pdf), but the implementation of all that research into a concrete camera probably took far less time. Hardware-wise the R is quite conventional in many ways. It's the software side and the UI that probably took, comparatively to other cameras' development, a longer time as it's quite different from existing Canon cameras. There's been a lot of efforts in that area. 
The R using a derivative of the 5DIV' sensor is probably the result of Canon wanting to launch the RF system right now combined with bad timing on their sensors production investments. I do believe that Canon would have preferred to launch that system with a more capable sensor, but that between launching right now with a less capable sensor and launching later with a more capable one, they decided that it was better for them to launch right now. That decision was probably taken quite a while ago.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 11, 2018)

fullstop said:


> nope. Canon could not finish their x-year development program in time, when Nikon launched.


Lol. You don't know how long it took, you just know it was planned and not finished on time. C'mon, just admit that you know all this stuff and can only post a little bit of it, because you're really Fujio Mitarai posting under a pseudonym.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 11, 2018)

syyeung1 said:


> Music and films are end products, Cameras are not. I don't think many would be interested to comment of the instruments musicians use, unless of course there is something wrong with the end product due to the tools they use


Musicians talk about their instruments among themselves and no doubt there is a big variation in quality of instrument, usually reflected in their price. But I get your point. They don’t obsess like photographers.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 11, 2018)

MayaTlab said:


> they decided that it was better for them to launch right now. That decision was probably taken quite a while ago.



Isn't that a contradiction? Launching 'right now' suggests a rapid response to something but you say the decision was taken 'a while ago'.
I am pretty sure that designing in a specific sensor takes far longer than looking at Nikon's press release in August and deciding you need to bring it forward a few months. Not to mention all the staff training, beta testing,publicity materials, launch planning etc....
It really does not take much grey matter to realise this.


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 11, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Isn't that a contradiction? Launching 'right now' suggests a rapid response to something but you say the decision was taken 'a while ago'.
> I am pretty sure that designing in a specific sensor takes far longer than looking at Nikon's press release in August and deciding you need to bring it forward a few months. Not to mention all the staff training, beta testing,publicity materials, launch planning etc....
> It really does not take much grey matter to realise this.



By "right now", I meant "late 2018". That decision could have very well been taken a long time ago. I agree with you that in no way is it a reaction to Nikon's release in late August, that's just impossible. But the R certainly feels to me like Canon's been brought to the FF mirrorless party with a timing that they're not that comfortable with. The last event was less the launch of a specific product, but rather of a new mount, as the rather incoherent body / lens lineup suggests. The R feels to me very much like a demonstrator for the RF glass, and Canon's UI and software innovation, less like a product Canon actually wants to sell en masse like the M50 (if that was their intention they'd have adopted the M50 pricing strategy at launch with a set of lenses in the vein of the 35mm f1.8 RF STM - but then people may have poo-pooed the RF mount as a "cheap" and not that serious mount, EF-M style, just like they did for Nikon's Z f1.8 primes, despite the latters' seemingly ambitious designs).


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 11, 2018)

Unfortunately I take the slightly pessimistic view that the R represents Canon's 'state of the art' for mirrorless. I don't think there is any rush as such and I think they are comfortable with what they have managed to produce. Realistically, what are they missing? A snappy AF and burst speed and I think both of those arise at least in part from sensor limitations and they may as well release this to asses other functionality while they work round the sensor limitations. 

This is very much a tester, just like the A7 was a tester and the original M series was a tester. There is no shame in that as long as they are not selling it as something it is not, and I see no evidence of that.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 11, 2018)

It is the imbalance between pedestrian EOS R specs and the high-end RF lenses released. They had 4 lenses ready to go, including 2 hi-end ones that are targeted at a "higher market niche". But only the lower-end body was ready and announced along with all 4 lenses. They simply did not manage to get the higher-end body "matching" the 2 hi-end lenses out the door now. Due to whatever delays. Hardware, sensor, software, beancounting - your guess is as good as mine.

Had they planned later launch of higher-end model all along, it would have made more sense to also hold off announcement of 50/1.2 and 28-70/2 for a joint announcement. Now they are probably scrambling to see whether they can get higher-end model finished plus 1 or 2 f/2.8 RF zooms along with it for a launch date in spring 2019.


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 11, 2018)

I agree, to me it's a tester. Like you I don't see it as a rushed product, far from it. But I do think that it isn't the timing Canon would have chosen if they hadn't felt a little pressure to release now. Honestly I don't think that Canon's salesmen are that comfortable with having to explain yet again why there's a crop in 4K . 
I would guess that Canon's management doesn't feel the need to spend the big bucks right now to update their sensors production capability to enable stuff like BSI / stacked sensors / copper wiring / (insert Sony marketing buzzword here). That's probably a very deliberate strategy (just like DPAF has been).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 11, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Now they are probably scrambling to see whether they can get higher-end model finished plus 1 or 2 f/2.8 RF zooms along with it for a launch date in spring 2019.


It looks more like you're scrambling for new ways to criticize your favorite punching bag. 

We know that FF MILCs are of paramount importance to you personally, but obviously you cannot come to grips with the fact that as far as the overall ILC market goes they are a niche product.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 11, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> Musicians talk about their instruments among themselves and no doubt there is a big variation in quality of instrument, usually reflected in their price. But I get your point. They don’t obsess like photographers.



Don't you be so sure. Pianists and their different models of Steinway vs Bosendorfer, violonists and their Strads, guitar freaks etc.


----------



## Kit. (Sep 11, 2018)

fullstop said:


> It is the imbalance between pedestrian EOS R specs and the high-end RF lenses released. They had 4 lenses ready to go, including 2 hi-end ones that are targeted at a "higher market niche". But only the lower-end body was ready and announced along with all 4 lenses. They simply did not manage to get the higher-end body "matching" the 2 hi-end lenses out the door now. Due to whatever delays. Hardware, sensor, software, beancounting - your guess is as good as mine.


My guess is that it's due to the idea that it's better to do beta-testing on enthusiasts than on pros.


----------



## Adelino (Sep 11, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Don't you be so sure. Pianists and their different models of Steinway vs Bosendorfer, violonists and their Strads, guitar freaks etc.


I think cameras are tools that are halfway between pure tools such as hammers, drills and circular saws and personal emotional artistic tools such as musical instruments which are non spec heavy.


----------



## melgross (Sep 11, 2018)

aa_angus said:


> Why wouldn’t cameras just continue to use Bluetooth or wifi to transfer files straight to our phones?


That’s what some can do now.

But that’s not a real solution. With my iPhone, and with Android models, I take a picture with a camera app, it doesn’t matter whether it’s Apple’s, or Adobe’s or any other. I then tap the share icon and select the way I’m sending it and the first letters of the name I’m sending it too, and hit send. All of that takes less than 30 seconds to do, and as little as 20. Now try doing that from an image in your camera. If you can send it to the phone, what do you need to do to do that? It’s several more steps, plus transmission time. The steps aren’t as easy or obvious either. The entire process is very clumsy.

The problem is that while you can do it, you won’t want to unless you REALLY want to send that photo. Remember that you’ll also likely have to resize that non-smartphone taken image before you send it.

Not nearly the same level of convenience. It’s one of the things Thom Hogan rails about with regularity, and one reason “cameras” are losing out to smartphones. Younger people, who’ve never had the love of sophisticated photography from the beginning, have little interest in it, and find smartphones far more suited to their uses, where small, low Rez images in Facebook, e-mail and messaging apps, Instagram, etc. are far more appealing.


----------



## melgross (Sep 11, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> So Canon set in train a 5 year development program knowing Nikon would do that om September 2018?


Why would Canon know that Nikon was planning both releases at once?

And as we don’t yet know what Canon has in mind for their next camera release, or when, we can’t make any realistic claims about it. The same thing is true for lenses.


----------



## melgross (Sep 11, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> Isn't that a contradiction? Launching 'right now' suggests a rapid response to something but you say the decision was taken 'a while ago'.
> I am pretty sure that designing in a specific sensor takes far longer than looking at Nikon's press release in August and deciding you need to bring it forward a few months. Not to mention all the staff training, beta testing,publicity materials, launch planning etc....
> It really does not take much grey matter to realise this.


Well, this is a Photokina year where major new products are announced, usually before the show. So this fits right in line with what he said. The decision was made some time ago, to release now, rather than to wait until some time afterwards, say, when the higher model became available.

That’s pretty simple.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 11, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Critics of films, music, plays etc rarely have the ability to direct films, write music or plays etc, but it doesn't stop them from being good critics. So, do you really think you have to be a designer genius to criticise design?



Of course not but there is a need for some capability or intelligence if the criticism is to have any merit. Often folk don't have a clue but that doesn't restrain them. Free world, free speech but not all speech is worth listening to. Sure it's fun to be an arm-chair quarterback but let's not be deluded.

Jack


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 11, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> It looks more like you're scrambling for new ways to criticize your favorite punching bag.
> 
> We know that FF MILCs are of paramount importance to you personally, but obviously you cannot come to grips with the fact that as far as the overall ILC market goes they are a niche product.



CR for the humour.

Jack


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 11, 2018)

fullstop said:


> my impression is more Canon could not finish the better model ("5D class", A7 III / Z7 competitor) in time to counter Nikon's launch. So they just went ahead with the lower model - "6D class" / Z6 competitor EOS R.



That makes sense. Or they were finished and registered it but wanted to make changes based on what Nikon released.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 11, 2018)

MayaTlab said:


> It probably doesn't take 5 years to make a camera like the R _pers se_. It's the culmination of years of development (in a _very interesting _PDF linked here Canon mentions that they envisioned DPAF in the late 90s : https://d25tv1xepz39hi.cloudfront.net/2018-09-05/files/EOS_R_An_Interview_with_the_Developers_.pdf), but the implementation of all that research into a concrete camera probably took far less time. Hardware-wise the R is quite conventional in many ways. It's the software side and the UI that probably took, comparatively to other cameras' development, a longer time as it's quite different from existing Canon cameras. There's been a lot of efforts in that area.
> The R using a derivative of the 5DIV' sensor is probably the result of Canon wanting to launch the RF system right now combined with bad timing on their sensors production investments. I do believe that Canon would have preferred to launch that system with a more capable sensor, but that between launching right now with a less capable sensor and launching later with a more capable one, they decided that it was better for them to launch right now. That decision was probably taken quite a while ago.



Excellent articles at that link. 

If you read (DPAF): 

"The simple concept of this technology was created in 1981, three years after the idea of phase-difference AF. It was still the era of film cameras, and it was not put into practical use. At the dawn of digital cameras in 1999, Canon first came up with the idea of the CMOS sensor configuration and started research. However, the barrier of technical challenges in achieving both imaging and phase-difference AF on one pixel was high, and it was forced to abandon the idea of putting it into practical application right away.", 

and think about it you'll have a better idea what's going on. However, some arm chair quarterbacks are going to dismiss DPAF as something simplistic scarcely worth praising or no more valuable than a stop of dynamic range.

Truth is, anyone can speak but not with equal intelligence, obviously. And some have a goal in mind, to make themselves look foolish, and they are smart enough to succeed. 

Jack


----------



## efmshark (Sep 11, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> Musicians talk about their instruments among themselves and no doubt there is a big variation in quality of instrument, usually reflected in their price. But I get your point. They don’t obsess like photographers.



I think if there is a group that obsesses more about their equipment than photographers, it is musicians. There seems to be no limit for the price range for high end instruments - even if we were to exclude hand-crafted historical specimens like the Stradivari. Thankfully, high end musical instruments retain their resale value much better than high end digital cameras.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 11, 2018)

Here is another tidbit:

"In fact, regardless of the large diameter mount, and short back focus, it would have been impossible to develop this lens for only that. The RF28-70mm F2 L USM uses a high precision glass-molded aspherical lens which overcomes the barrier of molding precision up until now, located at the position where it is most effective for miniaturization and high image quality. A new type of glass molding machine that was being developed for some time has been completed.

“The RF28-70mm F 2L USM is the *crown of research* and development, design and manufacturing technology that is always looking ahead and prepared for the future”

This is not a lens that is supposed to be priced for the masses, it's a statement lens displayed with pride.

And we hear, "Canon doesn't innovate", but I would suggest it's from folk who don't have a clue. I'm not a fanboy, just trying to be objective.

Jack


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 11, 2018)

The entire PDF is a gem and I'm surprised that it isn't talked about more.

A bit that I found quite funny concerns the 28-70mm f2 : 

"Furthermore, when a force greater than a certain level is applied from the front, the lens barrel also has a shock absorbing mechanism that retracts to the rear, achieving excellent impact resistance, toughness, and durability". 

In other words Canon's lens engineers weren't satisfied with just making the brightest FF standard zoom ever, they had to add a little extra damping mechanism, you know, just for kicks, as if the challenge wasn't big enough in the first place. It reminds me of Canon adding macro capability to the 24-70mm f4. It's as if they're incapable of doing standard specifications. 

I'm not saying that in a 100% positive way, though. Sometimes I wish Canon lens engineers would spend a bit less time playing who's got the biggest. I've been waiting for ages for a middle-range 50mm with decent resolution, and great OOF rendering, and it never arrived. And speaking of mirrorless cameras : I'm far more interested in Nikon's "lowly" (it isn't - in fact it's shaping up like the best performance / price ratio ever in a 50mm lens) f1.8 50mm Z than Canon's 50mm f1.2 RF (undoubtedly a great lens, but one that I couldn't care less about).


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 11, 2018)

efmshark said:


> I think if there is a group that obsesses more about their equipment than photographers, it is musicians. There seems to be no limit for the price range for high end instruments - even if we were to exclude hand-crafted historical specimens like the Stradivari. Thankfully, high end musical instruments retain their resale value much better than high end digital cameras.


I’ll yield to you superior musical acumen. But, are you aware of any musical instrument blogs that have exceeded 1000 posts within a week of a new release?


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 11, 2018)

There's also this bit that caught my attention : "Canon has proprietary data on the "hand size" of people from around the world. Developers selected users with large, small, and typical hand sizes, and tested repeatedly."

And then people still say that ergonomics are subjective... well, they might be at the individual level, but they can be rationalised at the statistical one.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 12, 2018)

robotfist said:


> Canon [...] has clearly lost touch with what professionals want in today’s age.



LOL


----------



## AlanF (Sep 12, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Of course not but there is a need for some capability or intelligence if the criticism is to have any merit. Often folk don't have a clue but that doesn't restrain them. Free world, free speech but not all speech is worth listening to. Sure it's fun to be an arm-chair quarterback but let's not be deluded.
> 
> Jack


Are you suggesting that some members of CR are incapable, lack intelligence and are unrestrained clueless?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 12, 2018)

AlanF said:


> Are you suggesting that some members of CR are incapable, lack intelligence and are unrestrained clueless?



It takes a great mind to state my thoughts so clearly.

Jack


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 12, 2018)

"The number of pixels itself is the same as EOS 5D Mark IV, but the sensor itself is newly developed. The content has changed a lot, such as adoption of a new dual pixel CMOS AF and arrangement of microlenses according to EOS R system. "

really? it's the same old tech, adjusting the angle of a few micro-lenses is nothing compared to multi-layers, BSI, high read out, etc.

other sensors can deliver ultra high quality over-sampled 4k video, super high DR etc.

someone on another site said the DR on this seems maybe not even as good as on a 6D2!


----------



## AlanF (Sep 12, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> It takes a great mind to state my thoughts so clearly.
> 
> Jack


One of the great virtues of democracy is that those characteristics have never been a bar to success.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 12, 2018)

Oh, here we go again on DR. Someone on another site said maybe ... AlanF, was that you?  Time to leave until serious reviews are posted so we actually know.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Sep 12, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Oh, here we go again on DR. Someone on another site said maybe ... AlanF, was that you?  Time to leave until serious reviews are posted so we actually know.
> 
> Jack


Not I. I haven't looked at any other sites for a while but I'll check.


----------



## Mikehit (Sep 12, 2018)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> someone on another site said the DR on this seems maybe not even as good as on a 6D2!


Let's criticise a sensor based on what someone may have said on another site somewhere on the internet...


----------



## MayaTlab (Sep 12, 2018)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> someone on another site said the DR on this seems maybe not even as good as on a 6D2!



It's similar to the 5DIV, as evaluated by Bill Claff : http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_ADU.htm#Canon EOS 5D Mark IV_14,Canon EOS R_14
(please don't compare the 5DIV and R with other cameras in the list, that graph isn't normalised for resolution differences).

Given the DNGs circulating, it's also got the same banding pattern. So a very, very similar performance.


----------



## mb66energy (Sep 12, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> Are kids the market for this camera?



If I am an adult kid ... yes.
I really like the EF-S 10-22 for its very low distortion and great contralight stability but it has very visible CA - correcting the CA in camera gives me very good video files which need only minor postprocessing.
My main application is video material for students for video analysis of motion etc.: If you need the full frame you can be happy to have good sharpness (very low CA is very helpful) straight to the corners sometimes. Doing the video in the classroom and put it to the students notebooks within a minute is a great advantage!


----------



## scyrene (Sep 12, 2018)

melgross said:


> Not nearly the same level of convenience. It’s one of the things Thom Hogan rails about with regularity, and one reason “cameras” are losing out to smartphones. Younger people, who’ve never had the love of sophisticated photography from the beginning, have little interest in it, and find smartphones far more suited to their uses, where small, low Rez images in Facebook, e-mail and messaging apps, Instagram, etc. are far more appealing.



Connectivity can certainly be improved, and ought to be. I'm not sure dedicated cameras will ever be able to compete with smartphones for ease of use though. Also, I expect the vast majority of images taken on phones are shared direct without transferring them to a computer first - I seriously doubt we'll see DSLRs (or MILCs) with Facebook and Twitter installed. As an aside, I think generalising about what 'young people' think is a bit suspect. The idea that 'the love of sophisticated photography' is greater in older generations is spurious, imho.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 12, 2018)

Jack Douglas said:


> Oh, here we go again on DR. Someone on another site said maybe ... AlanF, was that you?  Time to leave until serious reviews are posted so we actually know.
> 
> Jack


Jack
Stuck in Hong Kong airport and dying of boredom, I've done the search for you. It's actually posted in guess where: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...-the-canon-eos-r-raw-files.35809/#post-742829


----------



## melgross (Sep 12, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Connectivity can certainly be improved, and ought to be. I'm not sure dedicated cameras will ever be able to compete with smartphones for ease of use though. Also, I expect the vast majority of images taken on phones are shared direct without transferring them to a computer first - I seriously doubt we'll see DSLRs (or MILCs) with Facebook and Twitter installed. As an aside, I think generalising about what 'young people' think is a bit suspect. The idea that 'the love of sophisticated photography' is greater in older generations is spurious, imho.


You may think that, but the evidence is pretty clear, and not spurious. This isn’t the only industry seeing declining sales from a lack of new, younger users coming in. The audio industry, which I’m close to, is having the same problem.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 12, 2018)

melgross said:


> You may think that, but the evidence is pretty clear, and not spurious. This isn’t the only industry seeing declining sales from a lack of new, younger users coming in. The audio industry, which I’m close to, is having the same problem.



Where's your evidence that 'sophisticated photography' (however you're defining that) was more than a minority pursuit before? Weren't most pictures taken casually, with cheap gear - disposable cameras, instant cameras, etc? And (if not instant) developed at a local shop or posted off? The vast majority of people taking pictures in the past surely didn't use interchangeable lens cameras and develop themselves, nor did they know more about the technical side of photography than people now?

A decline in young blood can be caused by many things; a lack of high-end technical interest seems less likely than simply the device everyone carries all the time anyway getting exponentially better at taking pictures, and meeting most people's needs most of the time. Dedicated cameras have other advantages for those who are interested in particular types of shooting, but just as phones can't foreseeably have big sensors*, big interchangeable lenses, etc, high end cameras can't be shrunk down to pocket size*, nor can they offer the same connectivity or processing power. Better file transfer capability is desirable, but it can't be about trying to out smartphone the smartphones.

*Until and unless some technological revolution occurs, then all bets are off.


----------



## melgross (Sep 12, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Where's your evidence that 'sophisticated photography' (however you're defining that) was more than a minority pursuit before? Weren't most pictures taken casually, with cheap gear - disposable cameras, instant cameras, etc? And (if not instant) developed at a local shop or posted off? The vast majority of people taking pictures in the past surely didn't use interchangeable lens cameras and develop themselves, nor did they know more about the technical side of photography than people now?
> 
> A decline in young blood can be caused by many things; a lack of high-end technical interest seems less likely than simply the device everyone carries all the time anyway getting exponentially better at taking pictures, and meeting most people's needs most of the time. Dedicated cameras have other advantages for those who are interested in particular types of shooting, but just as phones can't foreseeably have big sensors*, big interchangeable lenses, etc, high end cameras can't be shrunk down to pocket size*, nor can they offer the same connectivity or processing power. Better file transfer capability is desirable, but it can't be about trying to out smartphone the smartphones.
> 
> *Until and unless some technological revolution occurs, then all bets are off.



We just have to look at sales. DSLR sales are off by more than half in the past several years. Compact camera sales by almost 90% over the past few years. Go to the photo sharing sites, and the most popular camera has been the iPhone, for years now, when earlier, it was always from a camera maker. The trend is clear. Who do you think is leading that trend, people like us, or younger?

People who took pictures in the past had to use cameras. What else was there? But going from the first 480 x 320 digital cameras (Casio, I’m pointing at you!) to what we have now, “real cameras”, came a new class of devices called cell phones. Those started out with pretty terrible cameras, as the first, small digital cameras were. But if you’re go8ng to have your phone anyway, you might decide - this time - to not take your camera too.

For us, that was a harder decision. But for younger people, such as my pro photographer daughter, who is 27, the decision comes more easily. Her friends who are not in the business, find it even easier. The problem for the camera industry is that while lower in quality, it’s good enough for most smartphones, and pretty good for a small few of them.

I just watched Apple’s presentation of the new Watch and iPhones. What Apple is doing in computational photography is amazing. Last year, their neural chip in the SoC did 600 billion computations a second. This year, it’s 5 trillion. The camera ISP decides what parts of the chip will do what with each image. The new HDR function takes about 8 pictures, and uses them in different ways to improve the image. A shot they showed of a woman in the water throwing her hair back with a flip of her head has tack sharp water droplets, even with all those images used. Continuously variable out of focus backgrounds adjustable after you take the picture, at any time, as many times as you want. Vastly improved hair detection for out of focus backgrounds, and far improved bokeh for that out of focus.

4K at up to 60fps.

DCI-P3 camera color gamut, with DCI-P3 screens, built-in Apple systemwide color management.

There’s actually more, including the bigger sensors for wide angle and telephoto cameras, etc.

The point is that smartphones are far smarter than far larger, heavier, and expensive cameras that do nothing more than take pictures. Is there a wonder that younger people who never really got a chance to buy an actual camera because they’ve had smartphones since they were 12, always had a camera with them? And those cameras are advancing faster than the ones we use.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 13, 2018)

[email protected] said:


> Canon has a long tradition of using the term "all new" for sensors that are merely adapted from one camera to another. There were dozens of 18mp sensors, each of which was "all new" relative to the last for a couple years back there. Maybe they consider an "all new" sensor to be one that isn't made from literally recycled parts. This camera's sensor is the 5d4 sensor with the adaptation of having microlenses that are made for the new flange difference. The performance, design, etc. is substantially identical to that of the 5d4's sensor.




For a couple of years? More like ten. The first version of the 5184x3456 pixel 18MP APS-C sensor appeared in the 7D in 2009. It's still being sold in the Rebel T6/1300D. Other bodies that had variations of it included the 60D, 550D, 600D, 650D, 700D, 100D, 1200D, EOS M, and EOS M10.


----------



## efmshark (Sep 20, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> I’ll yield to you superior musical acumen. But, are you aware of any musical instrument blogs that have exceeded 1000 posts within a week of a new release?



Unfortunately, most musicians are too busy practicing or gigging (or working at Guitar Center to make ends meet) to have enough spare time for blog posts...


----------



## dtgphoto (Sep 20, 2018)

Maybe this eos R is the branching point for two distinct specialist lines.. One line going cinema and 8k and all the video gubbins that some desire.. The other line going high resolution stills camera a la 5DSR. 

I would find that a great option and cpuld keep everyone happy


----------



## dtgphoto (Sep 23, 2018)

Did I just kill this thread?


----------

