# There will not be an EOS 5D Mark V [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 20, 2020)

> I have been told that the EOS 5D series is going the way of the EOS 7D series.
> There will be no direct DSLR successor for the EOS 5D Mark IV.
> The source claims that the EOS 5D Mark V development was stopped “some time ago”, and that there are no plans to make an EOS R5 version of the popular professional DSLR line.
> The same source adds that Canon is obviously aware of the popularity of the 5D line and the fact that there are still a lot of shooters that will prefer the DSLR experience. The source suspects that there is some kind of development going on to appease those users, but didn’t know exactly what it was.
> More to come…



Continue reading...


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 20, 2020)

OVF, bigger size, battery life are still on its side. But it would just be a R5 with the 1DXIII's AF system. To keep the line going perhaps just reuse the mark IV bodies. Or just push everyone to RF.


----------



## WriteLight (Jul 20, 2020)

Well, I guess no surprise with the success of the R5 but I know there will be a lot of folks who are disappointed.


----------



## Fischer (Jul 20, 2020)

Seems obvious to me. Never understood the many who claimed that Canon "had to" stick to FF DSLRs. Mirrorless is the future. If anything cheap small-form factor DSLR's may have a chance. Canon can continue to churn out 5DIV's for the die hard fans.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 20, 2020)

Fischer said:


> Seems obvious to me. Never understood the many who claimed that Canon "had to" stick to FF DSLRs. Mirrorless is the future. If anything cheap small-form factor DSLR's may have a chance. Canon can continue to churn out 5DIV's for the die hard fans.



I think they are even less likely. The XXXD and XXXXD bodies are still huge compared to a mirrorless and who wants to bring something that looks 'old' out on vacation when this mirrorless has a touch to focus screen and no viewfinder?


----------



## padam (Jul 20, 2020)

RIP 5D


----------



## Kiton (Jul 20, 2020)

From the CFO's point of view, it makes sense for Canon.

But, the 5d 4 is the best digital camera I have ever owned, I often take the 5d for an assignment over the 1dx 2 (NHL, MLS, CFL games etc aside).
I have 2x 1dx 2, and I have ordered a R5. Who knows, maybe the auto focus is so good that I will start using the R5 at hockey and football games. Will the legacy 400 2.8 and 300 2.8 be as fast on the R5 as an RF lens? So many unknowns still.
But, it is too soon to kill the line off, it is Canon's "anchor tenant" so to speak. They should make a 5d mk 5 to ease the transition.


----------



## Freddell (Jul 20, 2020)

Kiton said:


> But, it is too soon to kill the line off, it is Canon's "anchor tenant" so to speak. They should make a 5d mk 5 to ease the transition.


Agreed, there is still life left in EF mount, since they already took the investment on the R5 sensor and X processor, autofocus module in 1Dx etc there would only be a very small incremental cost to produce a MkV


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 20, 2020)

Not surprised at all mirrorless is the future now


----------



## mikebg (Jul 20, 2020)

Kiton said:


> From the CFO's point of view, it makes sense for Canon.
> 
> But, the 5d 4 is the best digital camera I have ever owned, I often take the 5d for an assignment over the 1dx 2 (NHL, MLS, CFL games etc aside).


I feel the same about the 5DIV, but I am sure that by the time the R5 MkII is released they will have ironed out all the problems with mirrorless and there really will be no point in a 5DV. That's my own reasoning. At the moment I see no reason to change my 5DIV, which really is a fantastic piece of kit.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

CR2, people.

I still think a 5D5 is happening. 

- A


----------



## lloyd709 (Jul 20, 2020)

Strategy fits in with the market that Canon is focusing on (excuse the pun) - people that don't use the kit to make a living but have deep pockets. Makes commercial sense I guess but it's not good for the most of the guys still eking out a living shooting. Budgets are tight and the last thing we can do with is an unnecessary complete kit switch for what is in reality very little gain (for me complete silent shooting would be handy sometimes) and loss in some departments (digital viewfinder, battery drain and I don't care for the slight reduction in size). I only know 2 professionals that use mirrorless and they were both 'sponsored' to do so!! I'm 50 and hoping for another 15 years shooting - wonder if I can get there with a 5DIV!!!!!


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 20, 2020)

I went shooting the other day with the EOS R and the 5DSR. Using the 5DSR again after adapting to mirrorless was like going back to the stone age. I know there are plenty of people who love DSLRs, but no-way I'd ever go back to using one as my primary camera again.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

I knew it!


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 20, 2020)

Just illustrates Canon’s confidence in the future belonging to mirrorless.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> CR2, people.
> 
> I still think a 5D5 is happening.
> 
> - A



I think we can all appreciate that Canon Rumors' success rate with rumors recently has been very high. If it's listed as a CR2 then that's the highest level of rumor below "FACT". 

You may *hope* than the 5D5 is happening, but I'd trust CR on this one.

Fortunately your current DSLRs will continue to work fine if you don't want to switch to mirrorless. As far as I know Canon are still building 5DIVs if you need a new one.


----------



## sean0306 (Jul 20, 2020)

_"there are no plans to make an EOS R5 version of the popular professional DSLR line" _

Shouldn't that read, "there are no plans to make a DSLR version of the R5?"


----------



## joestopper (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



No huge surprise. But full committment to mirrorless.
Confirmation that Canon is convinced that the R5 will meet (and esceed) all needs of former 5DIV users.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Jul 20, 2020)

I had only ever had DSLR's and went straight from a 7D mkII to the EOSR. The smaller body and weight loss was great. The sacrifice was the slow FPS but overall an easy move. with the R5 rectifying the FPS issue I'm a happy man, when I get the R5 delivered that is.

I never got to own or use a 5DIV but everyone I know swears by them as solid workhorses. I can understand the sadness if there is no newer version but as they say, time stands still for no man / woman lol. Hopefully the R5 will be the replacement and workhorse everyone wants it to be but you can always use it as a hand warmer in winter if you like shooting 8k a lot, allegedly.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> CR2, people.
> 
> I still think a 5D5 is happening.
> 
> - A



Are you joking, or is there some reason why your opinion would hold more weight than a sourced assertion from Canon Rumors?


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I think we can all appreciate that Canon Rumors' success rate with rumors recently has been very high. If it's listed as a CR2 then that's the highest level of rumor below "FACT".
> 
> You may *hope* than the 5D5 is happening, but I'd trust CR on this one.
> 
> Fortunately your current DSLRs will continue to work fine if you don't want to switch to mirrorless. As far as I know Canon are still building 5DIVs if you need a new one.



I thought there were CR3's too?


----------



## spandau (Jul 20, 2020)

Look at the sales figures for Interchangeable Lens 35mm sensor cameras. Down, down, down and we will be fortunate if Canon has an R series line in the next five years, let alone a 5d series.


----------



## mppix (Jul 20, 2020)

Obvious news for anyone that paid attention how much effort Canon put into RF ranging from lenses to bodies.

This one is going down like FD to EF


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

Freddell said:


> Agreed, there is still life left in EF mount, since they already took the investment on the R5 sensor and X processor, autofocus module in 1Dx etc there would only be a very small incremental cost to produce a MkV



You make a lot of assumptions there about manufacturing an actual consumer product that are not true. Yes, you could see some cost savings in R&D by making a MK V reuse some R5 components vs. designing and producing new ones, but it's not as simple as swapping out parts in assembly...even if it was, the new body would still need to go through the various global certification processes. Also, the existence of such a camera would slow down the sales of both new bodies and all RF glass. The limitations of the R5 as compared to the MK IV are so minimal, there are no realistic justifications for making the other body.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 20, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Are you joking, or is there some reason why your opinion would hold more weight than a sourced assertion from Canon Rumors?


So far, it is still a rumor. Everyone can apply their own weights.


----------



## padam (Jul 20, 2020)

I guess they could still make some crazy 'frankencamera' with an RF-mount, where you can either have a mirror box EF-mount adapter with an optical finder and the separate AF sensor, or just an electronic viewfinder.
Probably too complicated, although Hasselblad still makes modular cameras, like CFV II 50C digital back and the 907X


----------



## SV (Jul 20, 2020)

CR2...


----------



## JoTomOz (Jul 20, 2020)

To me it makes sense to have another full frame camera, perhaps between/consolidating the 5d and 6d, like where the 5dii was in the market...

real world reception of the R5 and R6 will tell


----------



## OmarSV11 (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon (and Nikon) just did the "Wait for it... wait for it...." strategy. Everyone was rushing their mirrorless products while these guys started a deep R&D to launch late and with godly specs, at least Canon. 1DX mk3 will be the last PRO DSLR in my opinion, and seeing this it's the death of any pro level market. I guess Rebels still have their market for a while. XXD will be replaced with a new RF APS-C un a very near future. No one likes changes but in the end everyone's gets used to them. Mirrorless is the present and future.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> So far, it is still a rumor. Everyone can apply their own weights.



And you are providing more weight to your own opinion (which appears to be wishful thinking), with no direct knowledge or access to those who do, than those of this site. That's ridiculous.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 20, 2020)

OmarSV11 said:


> Canon (and Nikon) just did the "Wait for it... wait for it...." strategy. Everyone was rushing their mirrorless products while these guys started a deep R&D to launch late and with godly specs, at least Canon. 1DX mk3 will be the last PRO DSLR in my opinion, and seeing this it's the death of any pro level market. I guess Rebels still have their market for a while. XXD will be replaced with a new RF APS-C un a very near future. No one likes changes but in the end everyone's gets used to them. Mirrorless is the present and future.


Mirrorless is the present and future for the mass market. EVF’s are a long way from replacing the abilities of OVF’s and until they can there will still be an active DSLR user base.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 20, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> And you are providing more weight to your own opinion (which appears to be wishful thinking), with no direct knowledge or access to those who do, than those of this site. That's ridiculous.


I did not state an opinion, but, yes I do give a lot of weight to my opinion.


----------



## Maximilian (Jul 20, 2020)

I suppose the preorders of the R5 were too good.

Sad, because I I thought the Mark IV was not an adequate final point for this series.
Good tool but the series would have deserved something with big icing on top.


----------



## mclaren777 (Jul 20, 2020)

I am deeply saddened to hear this, though I could easily use my current 5D4s forever.

If Canon doesn't announce a 5D successor by the end of 2021, I'll probably buy two more 5D4s so I never "run out" of them.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> I did not state an opinion, but, yes I do give a lot of weight to my opinion.



Sorry, didn't realize you weren't the person I was originally responding to.


----------



## amorse (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon must have an absolute crap-ton of confidence in the R5/R6 then. Any big moves with a cornerstone product like the 5D series is going to be done at the risk of polarizing current users. 

Some will be excited for the change, some will begrudgingly transition, while others will not be quite ready to transition and maybe hold on to their old gear, or consider a different product. Canon appears to be gambling that the R5 will bring in more people than the 5D would, and that is a tall order considering the 5D has been such a key line for professional users. 

Maybe I'm overthinking it, but ceasing production of the 5D series in favour of a new line with a very familiar feel but different foundation may be a watershed moment for Canon. Now I really want to try one.


----------



## Gino_FOTO (Jul 20, 2020)

If this is true, its a smart move from Canon, no reason to keep that system alive anymore, especially when R is very well compatible with EF glass and accessories.


----------



## preppyak (Jul 20, 2020)

Freddell said:


> Agreed, there is still life left in EF mount, since they already took the investment on the R5 sensor and X processor, autofocus module in 1Dx etc there would only be a very small incremental cost to produce a MkV


But in a tighter market, selling fewer cameras, that incremental cost is probably the entire profit margin of the R5.

If you're Canon, what secures your future better. Producing two cameras that are functionally the same spec wise, but in different bodies, requiring two production and assembly lines or the efficiencies of scale of just one? Especially when that one product pushes people to purchase new lenses as well.


----------



## infared (Jul 20, 2020)

I think if a 5D5 was made with some sensor improvement AND a larger focus point spread, that a lot of people would buy it. ...


----------



## infared (Jul 20, 2020)

How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I think we can all appreciate that Canon Rumors' success rate with rumors recently has been very high. If it's listed as a CR2 then that's the highest level of rumor below "FACT".
> 
> You may *hope* than the 5D5 is happening, but I'd trust CR on this one.
> 
> Fortunately your current DSLRs will continue to work fine if you don't want to switch to mirrorless. As far as I know Canon are still building 5DIVs if you need a new one.




I'm not butt hurt or screaming into a pillow or anything. _My _next camera will be mirrorless, personally. 

But I am not one of the army of working professionals at weddings toting a 5D today. I think saying goodbye to that brand that quickly would be a mistake, but I don't have Canon's internal numbers to say 'See, look how many there are!'.

- A


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

SHAME SHAME SHAME! They could let us buyers decide which line we prefer! (Maybe some of us would get both!)


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> CR2, people.
> 
> I still think a 5D5 is happening.
> 
> - A


I DO HOPE you are RIGHT!


----------



## derpderp (Jul 20, 2020)

heck Canon can just release a 5DMk4.1 and those DSLR ppl will still be ok with it. Just keep the same body, upgrade the internals, and call it a day. Easy $$.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> Canon must have an absolute crap-ton of confidence in the R5/R6 then. Any big moves with a cornerstone product like the 5D series is going to be done at the risk of polarizing current users.
> 
> Some will be excited for the change, some will begrudgingly transition, while others will not be quite ready to transition and maybe hold on to their old gear, or consider a different product. Canon appears to be gambling that the R5 will bring in more people than the 5D would, and that is a tall order considering the 5D has been such a key line for professional users.




Good insights. 

Agree, it's either R5 pre-sales are beating plan (which is being interpreted as no longer needing the 5D line), or Canon wants to dangle such a rumor to convince us that waiting for a 5D5 will be fruitless.

Very well could be the former, though. Canon knew their pro staple 5D line would eventually go away, but it's possible that the timing of its exodus was built into various permutations of the R5 rollout. If the R5 blows up huge commercially, they can retire the 5D line sooner.

- A


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 20, 2020)

lloyd709 said:


> I'm 50 and hoping for another 15 years shooting - wonder if I can get there with a 5DIV!!!!!



Canon might continue selling the 5DmkIV for years, same as it sold the EOS 3 for a decade, and the EOS 1V for almost two.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2020)

Ok, neuro, I told you so. The grief I got!


----------



## LSXPhotog (Jul 20, 2020)

Part of me is sad to see the 5D line go, but another part of me couldn't care less... because I have no intention of owning another DSLR.

Just saying that still feels weird...but one look at my gear shelf and my entire inventory of DSLRs has been replaced and greatly surpassed by mirrorless cameras.

The lone survivor for me is my 1DX Mark II. Now that's potentially going to be replaced by the R5? It will all depend on battery life. Haha


----------



## slclick (Jul 20, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Ok, neuro, I told you so. The grief I got!


CR2's aren't exactly rubbing it in someone's face material.


----------



## slclick (Jul 20, 2020)

LSXPhotog said:


> Part of me is sad to see the 5D line go, but another part of me couldn't care less... because I have no intention of owning another DSLR.
> 
> Just saying that still feels weird...but one look at my gear shelf and my entire inventory of DSLRs has been replaced and greatly surpassed by mirrorless cameras.
> 
> The lone survivor for me is my 1DX Mark II. Now that's potentially going to be replaced by the R5? It will all depend on battery life. Haha



Your signature is stuff of legends


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

preppyak said:


> If you're Canon, what secures your future better. Producing two cameras that are functionally the same spec wise, but in different bodies, requiring two production and assembly lines or the efficiencies of scale of just one? Especially when that one product pushes people to purchase new lenses as well.




But this presumes that:

1) 5D users won't leave to another company that is still putting out modern SLRs.

2) Taking away mirrors will successfully prod photographers into going mirrorless. Some folks may just fold their arms and keep shooting with their 5D4s.

I"m not saying killing off the 5D line won't work -- it's inevitable, of course. But I just thought we'd get one more body before they did it. It's brazen to the point of arrogance for Canon to say '5D users want 45 x 20, IBIS and a tilty-flippy badly enough that they will pitch the mirror to get it rather than leave us altogether.'

...and Canon is many things, but they are neither cocky nor abrupt. Which means R5 pre-sales are possibly through the roof, and now they have some data-driven confidence that they can telegraph to us that the 5D's days are numbered.

- A


----------



## KrisK (Jul 20, 2020)

Well, I'm surprised. I'd have though maintaining a line of DSLRs -- 5D and 7D series -- would be an advantage over their ML-only competitors.


----------



## amorse (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I'm not butt hurt or screaming into a pillow or anything. _My _next camera will be mirrorless, personally.
> 
> But I am not one of the army of working professionals at weddings toting a 5D today. I think saying goodbye to that brand that quickly would be a mistake, but I don't have Canon's internal numbers to say 'See, look how many there are!'.
> 
> - A


I agree that sunsetting the 5D right now seems off. I had always (maybe erroneously) thought the 5D series was a big piece of Canon's bread and butter, and messing with a formula that works seems to me to be a a very un-Canon thing to do. That makes me think that if this is legit, then either Canon are truly changing philosophy or truly think that this body _is_ a spiritual successor to the 5D series and that current 5D users will see that if they try it. 

It's a huge gamble though. What if Canon's bet is off base, and those working professionals *demand* that OVF and will not cough up for a 1DXIII - do they look to a Nikon D850 even though it's a bit old(ish), or do they snap up some cheap 5D IVs for the next 4 years until they're ready to transition? I'm sure canon's internal numbers give insight int buying behaviour, but no-matter how you slice it, killing off the 5D for anything is a massive leap. Maybe their numbers suggested the 1D users would jump ship if that transition was too abrupt (hence the decision for another 1-series) where the 5D users were more accepting. 

I need to get one of these R5's in my grubby little hands to get a real feel for this!


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

derpderp said:


> heck Canon can just release a 5DMk4.1 and those DSLR ppl will still be ok with it. Just keep the same body, upgrade the internals, and call it a day. Easy $$.




There is nothing '4.1' at all about jumping from 30 x 7 to 45 x 20 / IBIS / tilty-flippy. That''s practically a Mk *VII* at the rate the 5D has improved it's specs historically. 

I have long thought the R5 would eventually lead to a same-spec'd 5D5, and yes the real estate inside the 5D form-factor body is surely there to do it. But adding a tilty-flippy and IBIS really makes this take on a more involved body redesign. I think Canon still make such a camera, but I don't think at all that's a 'drop in the latest hotness' sort of engineering proposition.

- A


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 20, 2020)

Let the haranguing begin! I am fine with killing off the 5D line as it appears the advantages of the R line far outweigh any benefits of the EF mount. Canon needs to put their energy and R&D dollars into tuning the platform and lens design to take further advantage of the new mount. They have so many holes to fill in the lens lineup and they still need to produce some additional compelling lenses to compete with offerings from others (Sony, Nikon, Sigma, etc.). 

I would like to see the R line move to more of a Tesla platform with significant improvements in the platform being release via firmware upgrades. 

I would also like to see more EF replacement+ and exotics that couldn't be done before in the R mount. These might include UWA at f2.8, additional macro options, TS lenses, a bunch of handhold able super telephoto lenses (400, 500, 600) and some longer telephoto zoom (200-400, 200-600, etc.). Too many to name at the entry level and high end. 

Those efforts require a lot of focus and investment. I think they clearly made the point with the release of the R5 and R6 that it is game on for mirrorless and all of their efforts are shifting in this direction for the next decade. 

Bob


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2020)

slclick said:


> CR2's aren't exactly rubbing it in someone's face material.


Fair enough. I've eaten crow before. Time will tell!


----------



## Joules (Jul 20, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> OVF, bigger size, battery life are still on its side. But it would just be a R5 with the 1DXIII's AF system. To keep the line going perhaps just reuse the mark IV bodies. Or just push everyone to RF.


To be fair, bigger size is no technical advantage of DSLR.

I don't think the 1DX III OVF AF could be reused in a cheaper model. After all, it is not the sensor, processor or LiveView AF that makes the thing so expensive (All of those are found in the much cheaper R6). Sure, there is build quality - but that brutal mirror motion and the second sensor may be just too hard to make to bring them down to lower bodies. Otherwise the abandoning of the 5 and 7 series makes less sense to me.

I get the impression that Canon just can't bring a DSLR to the level of speed and AF performance the R6 / R5 bring to the table without also making it more expensive than they'd like.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> I agree that sunsetting the 5D right now seems off. I had always (maybe erroneously) thought the 5D series was a big piece of Canon's bread and butter, and messing with a formula that works seems to me to be a a very un-Canon thing to do.




I'm not sure they make much money on the 5D bodies themselves. Sure, it's a premium $3K price point, but R&D on products with such high reliability expectations must be brutal and I am assuming that they are pricey to build.

I'm guessing, however, 5-series owners buy a TON of EF glass, speedlites, transmitters, grips, etc. That's ultimately what Canon seems to be gambling here (were this to be a CR3). There's surely more money for them selling the pricier RF lenses to the 5D camp, but that's only if they migrate like obedient serfs. Some may buck and defer upgrading their bodies, run to Nikon, etc.

- A


----------



## amorse (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Good insights.
> 
> Agree, it's either R5 pre-sales are beating plan (which is being interpreted as no longer needing the 5D line), or Canon wants to dangle such a rumor to convince us that waiting for a 5D5 will be fruitless.
> 
> ...


Maybe, but they haven't actually delivered any bodies yet - I mean pre-orders are great and all, but if this gets into customers hands and a revolt unfolds, Canon may have a bigger problem in the long run. If they made that decision, I think it would have been made a while ago - the 5D series is due for an updated release right now according to past release schedules - if the R5 missed the mark on preorders, they may struggle to get a 5DV moving in time to meet the market. I'd bet that if all this is true, that decision was made when we got the rumour to sunset development of the EF line.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jul 20, 2020)

Makes sense given what R5 has ended up being.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 20, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I went shooting the other day with the EOS R and the 5DSR. Using the 5DSR again after adapting to mirrorless was like going back to the stone age. I know there are plenty of people who love DSLRs, but no-way I'd ever go back to using one as my primary camera again.



I shoot with the 5DSR and can't wait for the arrival of my R5! I am so jealous of my friends shooting Nikon Z7 and Sony A7RIV and their fancy little tilty flippy screens, eye detection, superior focusing systems, zebra lines, etc., etc. 

Bob


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

Joules said:


> To be fair, bigger size is no technical advantage of DSLR.
> 
> I don't think the 1DX III OVF AF could be reused in a cheaper model. After all, it is not the sensor, processor or LiveView AF that makes the thing so expensive (All of those are found in the much cheaper R6). Sure, there is build quality - but that brutal mirror motion and the second sensor may be just too hard to make to bring them down to lower bodies. Otherwise the abandoning of the 5 and 7 series makes less sense to me.
> 
> I get the impression that Canon just can't bring a DSLR to the level of speed and AF performance the R6 / R5 bring to the table without also making it more expensive than they'd like.


They can come close and still succeed. For example same sensor and digic as R5 but let's say 10fps mechanical and 20 fps electronic is no disaster at all. Cards same as of R5. AF system same as 1DxIII (just like 5D4 and 1DxII).
Done! I would upgrade and maybe I would get a second one!


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> EVF’s are a long way from replacing the abilities of OVF’s and until they can there will still be an active DSLR user base.


At 120Hz, EVF isn't far off a real-time OVF. And EVFs are actually better in the dark. OVFs are on a very thin ice at the moment.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 20, 2020)

tron said:


> SHAME SHAME SHAME! They could let us buyers decide which line we prefer! (Maybe some of us would get both!)


And maybe Canon could go out of business. They are going to make business decisions based on their marketing research and Knowledge of the industry and technologies.


----------



## Joules (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> ...and Canon is many things, but they are neither cocky nor abrupt.


I don't know about that one. They are the guys who tried to tell the people they don't need 24p, and maintain a similar position about many other features. There is a reason Magic Lantern existed. There is nothing wrong with it and I agree that crippling is the wrong word. But as I see it, Canon absolutely has an image of what the majority of people value enough to pay for and is comfortably withholding things that they don't really need. Even though they want it.

I can see how Canon sees the 5D V as one of those things. People want it, but the majority may not need it enough to make it worth putting the effort into a fading system.


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

RobbieHat said:


> I shoot with the 5DSR and can't wait for the arrival of my R5! I am so jealous of my friends shooting Nikon Z7 and Sony A7RIV and their fancy little tilty flippy screens, eye detection, superior focusing systems, zebra lines, etc., etc.
> 
> Bob


I do birding with 5DsR and I like it a lot! Recently I replaced it with a new one (and I part exchanged the older one for another product). I am not envy of these things. I also have a 5DIV for low light/landscape/general purpose shots.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

Also, if true, this would mean _*the beginning of the end of the chunky grip*_ for the 99% of us who don't shoot a 1-series body.

The 'mirrorless is all about being small' may have utterly lost the argument at this point (I refer you to a growing tide of awesome RF pickle jar lenses), but they did push Canon into an A7-ification of the body/grip strategy.

R/R5 have much better grips than A7, but you take my point: Canon doesn't seem to be scaling up grip and body sizes for bodies more likely to be toting those huge lenses. This is Canon following suit to Sony in broad strokes rather than sticking to its guns, which has got to be painful for them. One can only assume they have market data that shows that the R platform is 'first impressions DOA' if they went with SLR-experience informed chunky grips.

I personally loved Canon's old model. The nicer the rig --> more likely bigger glass is going on it --> you get a chunkier grip. #sadness

- A


----------



## IVS (Jul 20, 2020)

joestopper said:


> No huge surprise. But full committment to mirrorless.
> Confirmation that Canon is convinced that the R5 will meet (and esceed) all needs of former 5DIV users.


We'll see about that when it comes down to battery life... Some might need to rent a mule just to carry those LP-E6NH miracle juicers around


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> And maybe Canon could go out of business. They are going to make business decisions based on their marketing research and Knowledge of the industry and technologies.


Whaat? Unless someone from Canon tells me so I cannot believe it! And Don't forget: CR2!


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jul 20, 2020)

I just hope that CPS will not shut down service and parts for it.


----------



## Joules (Jul 20, 2020)

tron said:


> They can come close and still succeed. For example same sensor and digic as R5 but let's say 10fps mechanical and 20 fps electronic is no disaster at all. Cards same as of R5. AF system same as 1DxIII (just like 5D4 and 1DxII).
> Done! I would upgrade and maybe I would get a second one!


But that's what I'm saying. Take a look at how the AF in the 1DX III OVF works. It is unlike anything we've seen before. I would not make any bets that they can reuse that at a lower price point.

It is not about how much they can improve it. It is about how much they can improve it while reducing costs - after all it will be purchased less than previous 5 series models due to the RF system.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jul 20, 2020)

> There will be no direct DSLR successor for the EOS 5D Mark IV.


NOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooo!!



> The same source adds that Canon is obviously aware of the popularity of the 5D line and the fact that there are still a lot of shooters that will prefer the DSLR experience. The source suspects that there is some kind of development going on to appease those users, but didn’t know exactly what it was.


Ehhhhhhhhhh?? So, some hope after all...........??


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> Makes sense given what *the specs of the* R5 have ended up being.




Fixed that for you  . 

Reminder, we don't know if this is a problem-free camera that delivers on all the fronts it advertises. I trust Canon and expect it to be a zinger of a product, but I would not be shocked if:

1) There are some niggling issues that make that spec sheet seem a tad less shiny. 12/20 fps coming with major baggage depending on what is turned on, we've seen the recording time vs heat information, etc. 12 bit RAW for stills in some of the more demanding modes might also be a letdown for some.​​2) The IBIS is only good and not great. Canon may be setting itself up for some embarrassment if folks only get 5 stops of IBIS instead of the 8 they advertise on some lenses.​
So I am surprised Canon -- again, if this rumor is true -- might be dangling this rumor before reviews truly cement the performance and launch dollars of this product.

- A


----------



## domo_p1000 (Jul 20, 2020)

I would be very surprised (but also deeply saddened) to see any more EF bodies or glass appearing. I have always been a very happy EOS-1-range user, so am loving the 1DX3, but as one of the three people on the planet who has always carried the 35-350L (originally) and then the 28-300L, I have been waiting desperately for an update to that: 24-300L EF would be a dream, and sadly it turns out that it will only ever be a dream.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Jul 20, 2020)

infared said:


> How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?



EF glass performs better on R bodies than it does on native DSLRs. AF off sensor is simply more accurate and flexible than through an OVF. The trade off is ergonomics, depending on the lens.

I can understand why some would be resistant to mirrorless. Perhaps the OVF has already been romanticized, similar to how shooting on film has been. Some will never make the switch, and that's okay. I suspect 5DIV's will continue to function for decades+ into the future and will always be an option for people, whether they shoot professionally or otherwise.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> It's a huge gamble though. What if Canon's bet is off base, and those working professionals *demand* that OVF and will not cough up for a 1DXIII - do they look to a Nikon D850 even though it's a bit old(ish), or do they snap up some cheap 5D IVs for the next 4 years until they're ready to transition? I'm sure canon's internal numbers give insight int buying behaviour, but no-matter how you slice it, killing off the 5D for anything is a massive leap. Maybe their numbers suggested the 1D users would jump ship if that transition was too abrupt (hence the decision for another 1-series) where the 5D users were more accepting.



Why would a person switch their entire system - not just body, lenses and flashes and everything else - just to avoid Canon mirrorless? Because there would be significant cost to doing that, which would far exceed the cost of trading in a MK IV and purchasing a 1DX III, superior in every way to the MK IV except for size/weight and megapixels. The D850 gets you to 45 MP, sure, but a 5DS gets you to 50, and though I agree it lags behind both the MK IV and D850 in other ways, those gaps are addressed either by the 1DX or by moving to mirrorless and buying an EF>RF adapter.

Bottom line - The 1DX III exists because there wasn't and still isn't a mirrorless equivalent. The 5D MK V won't exist because there is.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> At 120Hz, EVF isn't far off a real-time OVF. And EVFs are actually better in the dark. OVFs are on a very thin ice at the moment.


OVF’s are on no more thin ice than film cameras. There are millions of them out there and millions more bargain lenses as the majority transition to MILC’s, but they work perfectly and unlike film cameras they don’t rely on anything else. 120Hz might be better than 60Hz, but many users will never transition fully or even partially to battery hungry EVF’s. Who cares if there isn’t another generation of OVF cameras? I don’t, I know and fully accept the limitations in my image making are my own, not because I don’t have more FPS, an EVF, RF lenses, eye tracking etc etc.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

IVS said:


> We'll see about that when it comes down to battery life... Some might need to rent a mule just to carry those LP-E6NH miracle juicers around




Camera vests to make a huge comeback in 2020, but instead of film and filters, those pockets are full of batteries. 

- A


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Which means R5 pre-sales are possibly through the roof, and now they have some data-driven confidence that they can telegraph to us that the 5D's days are numbered.


Or, perhaps means that pre-sales are not that amazing, with lots of 5 series users reporting back that they will just wait to see what gives with a 5Dv before making a decision, and Canon have decided that a 'helpful' rumour leak to push ditherers (like me) over the edge and more firmly into the R5/6 camp may be useful......? 
Just wondering out loud  

I have to admit that I, regretfully, feel the R5 may well be the nail in the 5D coffin.

Cheers Stoical.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 20, 2020)

infared said:


> How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?



I've seen some reviews by shooters with pre-pro copies that say their legacy(EF) glass actually performs better than on their EF bodies, because of the superior AF system in the R5, which makes complete sense. I don’t see why it would perform worse, presuming you’re using one of Canon’s own designed and manufactured adapters. There were those saying the same thing with production copies of the R and RP, as well.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> EF glass performs better on R bodies than it does on native DSLRs. AF off sensor is simply more accurate and flexible than through an OVF. The trade off is ergonomics, depending on the lens.
> 
> I can understand why some would be resistant to mirrorless. Perhaps the OVF has already been romanticized, similar to how shooting on film has been. Some will never make the switch, and that's okay. I suspect 5DIV's will continue to function for decades+ into the future and will always be an option for people, whether they shoot professionally or otherwise.



Yes. See Ken Rockwell's use of the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM on an EOS R with both a 1.4x and 2.0x extender (gen 2) in front of it here: https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/100-400mm-ii.htm . The R5/R6 will only be better.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Why would a person switch their entire system - not just body, lenses and flashes and everything else - just to avoid Canon mirrorless? Because there would be significant cost to doing that, which would far exceed the cost of trading in a MK IV and purchasing a 1DX III, superior in every way to the MK IV except for size/weight and megapixels. The D850 gets you to 45 MP, sure, but a 5DS gets you to 50, and though I agree it lags behind both the MK IV and D850 in other ways, those gaps are addressed either by the 1DX or by moving to mirrorless and buying an EF>RF adapter.
> 
> Bottom line - The 1DX III exists because there wasn't and still isn't a mirrorless equivalent. The 5D MK V won't exist because there is.




*...to you*. Agree with most of your points, but to answer your question:

_"Why would a person switch their entire system - not just body, lenses and flashes and everything else - just to avoid Canon mirrorless?"_​
The answer might be:

Someone has been shooting with an SLR since forever and does not want to give up that experience
They hate EVFs altogther or never could get over the 'weirdness' first stages of trying one out 
They value something very highly that only an OVF can do -- responsiveness, use as a power-free spotting scope for wildlife, etc.
They are luddites who trust principally mechanical devices more than overly electronic ones
Perhaps they don't trust/like/want to deal with adaptors for their EF glass
This may not be mirrorless related at all -- perhaps they have huge hands and don't want to downgrade their grip, ergonomics, handling, etc. with the R platform's more compact setup.
- A


----------



## bergstrom (Jul 20, 2020)

when canon gave their 5D buyers the middle finger. Thanks.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> I've seen some reviews by shooters with pre-pro copies that say their legacy(EF) glass actually performs better than on their EF bodies, because of the superior AF system in the R5, which makes complete sense. I don’t see why it would perform worse, presuming you’re using one of Canon’s own designed and manufactured adapters. There were those saying the same thing with production copies of the R and RP, as well.




+1. And adapting EF to R unlocks some very neat stuff for SLR users:

AF points all over the frame when using the viewfinder
A control ring
Rear CPL or ND for heretofore very difficult to filter lenses
- A


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> OVF’s are on no more thin ice than film cameras.



True. Also they say Pentax is sticking to DSLR for now. DSLR will stay for long time but will become a niche product.
However my message was about your statement that 'EVF’s are a long way from replacing the abilities of OVF’s '. In terms of the abilities, EVFs are catching up very fast and already overtook OVFs in many aspects.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

<singing loudly> I knew this was coming so I baked a cake.


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

Joules said:


> But that's what I'm saying. Take a look at how the AF in the 1DX III OVF works. It is unlike anything we've seen before. I would not make any bets that they can reuse that at a lower price point.
> 
> It is not about how much they can improve it. It is about how much they can improve it while reducing costs - after all it will be purchased less than previous 5 series models due to the RF system.


Maybe but only because R5 came first. If 5DV were to appear 1 year before R5 we cannot know how well it would sell. And what about lower price point talks? 5D4 had lower price than 1DxII and it used its AF system. True 1DxII was stil faster etc but you get the point...


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

Kiton said:


> But, it is too soon to kill the line off, it is Canon's "anchor tenant" so to speak. They should make a 5d mk 5 to ease the transition.



The transition, so to speak, has come and gone.

The hint was the EOS-R, and the confirmations are the R5 and R6.

Still more to come as well.

I love my 5D4 and will continue to use it, but I have no interest in anything but mirrorless OVF cameras myself. That ship has sailed.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 20, 2020)

I guess there is always Pentax to consider...


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 20, 2020)

I have 2x 5DmkII’s, a mkIII, a mkIV, EOS-3 and a lot of EF, mostly L, glass. Who cares if they’re not continuing with the “5D” line as a DSLR, as long as we get a superior replacement, which they have given us. I’ve literally spent over half of my life shooting “TV”, so I couldn’t care less about the tiny OVF in DSLR’s. I’ve been using EVF’s, just on a professional basis, for approaching a quarter century. The only real drawbacks I see, so far, are the slightly smaller body and the battery life. Canon is usually at the top of the hill with still cam ergonomics, but they need to remember that there are still human hands holding and using these cameras and just because you can make something smaller, doesn’t mean you should.


----------



## HenryL (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> But this presumes that:
> 
> 1) 5D users won't leave to another company that is still putting out modern SLRs.
> 
> ...



What company is still putting out modern SLRs that is not sometime in the near future going to abandon them as well? If I was a working pro using 5D4's, I would continue using 5D4's rather than pay the premium of switching systems - only to end up in another dead end. Not like the existing camera's are going to suddenly stop working, and Canon is still manufacturing them so you can get them brand new. They still make the 7D2 and it as released two years earlier than the 5D4.


----------



## tcphoto (Jul 20, 2020)

I am a happy owner of a couple 5DIV’s and a half dozen L’s that do what I need of them. I make or at least made my living shooting images mainly for large Restaurant Groups before these current events. Besides, I shoot 90% of my projects on a tripod and tethered to a computer, so I see very few reasons to buy an R5 or any mirrorless system. I also hate adding an adapter in order to use EF lenses on an R body, it’s like Apple requiring a dongle to add a peripheral to a MBP. Who knows what will happen, will our clients or industry evaporate? Besides, I am not investing any more money into gear unless it’s absolutely necessary.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> True. Also they say Pentax is sticking to DSLR for now. DSLR will stay for long time but will become a niche product.
> However my message was about your statement that 'EVF’s are a long way from replacing the abilities of OVF’s '. In terms of the abilities, EVFs are catching up very fast and already overtook OVFs in many aspects.


And that is your opinion and you are welcome to it. I will keep trying them out but don’t take them seriously yet as much of my real use involves looking through a viewfinder for hours at a time and I haven’t found one that comes close the experience of an OVF. They are different and always will be, that EVF‘s are capable of functionality impossible in an OVF isn’t the point, that OVF’s are capable of things that EVF’s are not is. No EVF will ever be able to stay on for hours and not use any battery power, no EVF will ever have zero lag...


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Mirrorless is the present and future for the mass market. EVF’s are a long way from replacing the abilities of OVF’s and until they can there will still be an active DSLR user base.



User base, yes. Market expansion? Not so much IMO. I love and use my 5D4 alongside the EOS-R but I prefer mirrorless. When the R5 gets here the go to will be the EOS-R and the R5.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> I am deeply saddened to hear this, though I could easily use my current 5D4s forever.
> 
> If Canon doesn't announce a 5D successor by the end of 2021, I'll probably buy two more 5D4s so I never "run out" of them.



By the end of 2021 you may only find them used.


----------



## Fran Decatta (Jul 20, 2020)

Having in mind all the DSLR limitations, I wonder why people still wanting to have a Reflex in his hands. Yeah, the battery can work for longer, and you see the image through a real mirror and feel how it takes the photo... but in low light situations MLC focus better, almost have no limitations on the frame, you can see histogram and the final exposure on the viewfinder, IBIS, totally silent shutter and faster... I would be glad to hear the reasons of anyone to still preferring a DSLR over those R5 and R6 bodies.


----------



## amorse (Jul 20, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Why would a person switch their entire system - not just body, lenses and flashes and everything else - just to avoid Canon mirrorless? Because there would be significant cost to doing that, which would far exceed the cost of trading in a MK IV and purchasing a 1DX III, superior in every way to the MK IV except for size/weight and megapixels. The D850 gets you to 45 MP, sure, but a 5DS gets you to 50, and though I agree it lags behind both the MK IV and D850 in other ways, those gaps are addressed either by the 1DX or by moving to mirrorless and buying an EF>RF adapter.
> 
> Bottom line - The 1DX III exists because there wasn't and still isn't a mirrorless equivalent. The 5D MK V won't exist because there is.


To be clear, I'm not betting people are leaving in droves, I'm saying there will be camps of photographers who fall on different sides of the decision, and Canon is betting more will jump into an R5 than leave the ecosystem. Everyone has different needs and no camera can act as a one-size-fits-all. Who would consider leaving instead of going to an R5 from a 5DIV? I can think of a couple scenarios which could apply.

Anyone that wants more than 20mp, an OVF, and improved sensor performance over the 5D IV - Canon would have nothing in their ecosystem to fill that hole, but the D850 would fill it. If Nikon were to continue releasing bodies in that vein, it may be attractive to those really wanting an OVF. Obviously that remains to be seen.

Or, what about someone who wants improved sensor performance/resolution but requires better battery life per battery than the R5 offers? As an example, I'm already carrying 5 LPE6Ns with my 5DIV and burn through all of them on my hiking trips without opportunity to re-charge. The CIPA rating on a 5D IV is 900 shots per, but the R5 is 320. According to CIPA ratings, I'd need 14 batteries for the same activity. I could see that being annoying enough for some to consider changes.

Again, I don't think you're going to see people leaving in droves, but assuming no-one will is a reach in my opinion.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> +1. And adapting EF to R unlocks some very neat stuff for SLR users:
> 
> AF points all over the frame when using the viewfinder
> A control ring
> ...



Yes. I believe when I get my R5, I will probably get the control ring adapter for it and assign the aperture to it.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> or consider a different product.




Not much else to look at out there that isn't mirrorless...

You can jump ship, but there aren't many places to swim to.


----------



## schiueva (Jul 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?
> ...


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

infared said:


> How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?




It performs flawlessly on my EOS-R - I doubt the R5 will be any different.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

tron said:


> Maybe but only because R5 came first. If 5DV were to appear 1 year before R5 we cannot know how well it would sell.



If we follow 5D line life cycle, the 5DV would be due this year. Instead we have the R5. Which indicates, implicitly Canon tells us 'R5 = 5DV'.
Best case Canon releases 5DV next year so that it doesn't compete with the R5. But most likely this rumour is true and we'll never see the 5DV.


----------



## schiueva (Jul 20, 2020)

infared said:


> How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?


I don’t know about R5. But on eosr Most EF glass is not as sharp as the R glass at the corner. The performance is similar to me.


----------



## MinoltaSRT101 (Jul 20, 2020)

I have a 5diii and an EOS R. I wear glasses and often shoot action in bright sunshine. The action can be difficult to follow with the R. Also, I sometimes find the glare causes it to be very difficult to see through the viewfinder in the R, but have no such issues with the optical viewfinder. I've ordered the R5 with the hope that both problems are resolved. They've talked about the refresh rate resolving the lag, but I have not heard anything about the glare issues for eyeglass wearers. I love the R's electronic viewfinder in all other situations.


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

LSXPhotog said:


> Part of me is sad to see the 5D line go, but another part of me couldn't care less... because I have no intention of owning another DSLR.
> 
> Just saying that still feels weird...but one look at my gear shelf and my entire inventory of DSLRs has been replaced and greatly surpassed by mirrorless cameras.
> 
> The lone survivor for me is my 1DX Mark II. Now that's potentially going to be replaced by the R5? It will all depend on battery life. Haha


Battery endurance is important to me and it seems that we are talking a 5 times difference! The only mitigation to this issue is the capability of R5 and R6 to be charged by a capable compatible PD battery bank.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Also, if true, this would mean _*the beginning of the end of the chunky grip*_ for the 99% of us who don't shoot a 1-series body.
> 
> The 'mirrorless is all about being small' may have utterly lost the argument at this point (I refer you to a growing tide of awesome RF pickle jar lenses), but they did push Canon into an A7-ification of the body/grip strategy.
> 
> ...


I think body size has still got to shake out over time. What makes sense to me is 1. For those wanting a minimalist body, you go for the M-System. 2. For those who mount pickle jars, supertelephotos, or who want body heat sinks for longer video recordings. — well we will have to see where that goes, but somewhat bigger than R would work for me.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

RobbieHat said:


> Let the haranguing begin! I am fine with killing off the 5D line as it appears the advantages of the R line far outweigh any benefits of the EF mount. Canon needs to put their energy and R&D dollars into tuning the platform and lens design to take further advantage of the new mount. They have so many holes to fill in the lens lineup and they still need to produce some additional compelling lenses to compete with offerings from others (Sony, Nikon, Sigma, etc.).
> 
> I would like to see the R line move to more of a Tesla platform with significant improvements in the platform being release via firmware upgrades.
> 
> ...




You had me until you said Tesla.


----------



## Colorado (Jul 20, 2020)

StoicalEtcher said:


> Or, perhaps means that pre-sales are not that amazing, with lots of 5 series users reporting back that they will just wait to see what gives with a 5Dv before making a decision, and Canon have decided that a 'helpful' rumour leak to push ditherers (like me) over the edge and more firmly into the R5/6 camp may be useful......?


The decisions to develop (or not develop) a particular camera model likely happens years in advance of release. The rumor even states the decision was made "some time ago". So the decision wasn't made based on R5 presales numbers. This is where the oft-disparaged executives make their money. They have to decide a high level strategy direction based on very fuzzy data. Meaning their market analysis showed the R5 would be feature complete enough for it to make sense to discontinue the 5D line. Some may call that a gamble but in terms of bringing a product to market (any complex product, not just cameras) it is just how businesses are forced to operate.


----------



## MORphoto.net (Jul 20, 2020)

Duh. I would seriously question Canon's business direction if they did put out a mark V ... a camera that can only have disadvantages from mirrorless. An OVF was an advantage years ago when mirrorless just kinda sucked. I'm still surprised they put out the 1DX mark III just to appease those that still can't even accept that film is dead. Canon will never make another EF lens, so why would they make more high end DSLRs? I can maybe see bottom end Rebels, but that's it.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 20, 2020)

tron said:


> I do birding with 5DsR and I like it a lot! Recently I replaced it with a new one (and I part exchanged the older one for another product). I am not envy of these things. I also have a 5DIV for low light/landscape/general purpose shots.



I too shoot birds and astro with the 5DSR and it is not ideal for either. Too slow for BIF and rarely locks focus (much less acquires focus) when I shoot birds. When it hits it is awesome. Great detail and ability to crop without significant loss of resolution. But it is frustrating for moving subjects. As for astro, I just used it last night on comet and MW. Too much noise and inability to handle higher ISO. As a result, I have to pair it with super fast UWA Sigma lenses to get decent shots. 

I will happily replace my 5DSR for all the improvements the R5 promises for my style of shooting. I might also add the high MP body for landscape work when it is introduced but will likely give that one some time to understand what tradeoffs come with so many MP and if it is more of a studio beast or will work well in the wild. 

Bob


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> At 120Hz, EVF isn't far off a real-time OVF. And EVFs are actually better in the dark. OVFs are on a very thin ice at the moment.




I'll go further - the ability to see how my on-the-fly changes to my settings as I pursue a target (usually a uncooperative bird) in real time has made me a better photographer.

Unlike studios or even the posed pictures at weddings, wildlife is very unforgiving. You can't ask the critter for a do over, or move them into better light, or whatever. Being able to see what you're doing 'at that very instant' often makes the difference between a keeper and having another blurred over/under 'one that got away...'

I'm nowhere near as experienced or intelligent when it comes to the true mechanics of photography as many here are - the level of knowledge is astounding and it's one of the reasons I like this place so much. But I do know what works for me and the EVF is amazing.

The EOS-R's EVF isn't the greatest but I've learned to work around it and still prefer it to the OVF on my 5D4. I can't want to see the YOOOOOOGE OLED 120hz display on the R5.


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 20, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> You had me until you said Tesla.



LOL. Certainly not with all the drama that surrounds the CEO, but the idea of a platform that improves significantly overtime via SW updates is intriguing. It has certainly thrown the auto industry into a tailspin and has been a successful platform for smartphones for some time. Could be an interesting approach for cameras as well. At least to extend a platform's life or offer add-ons as a subscription fee (SW defined ND filters, different SW defined low pass filters for different use cases (astro, landscape, studio (fabric), wildlife, etc.). Different or customizable image cropping sizes. The list goes on and on.


----------



## zim (Jul 20, 2020)

RIP OVF and f/1.4 lenses sometimes you've just gotta let go. I know I have. Queue Titanic film ending.....


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 20, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> User base, yes. Market expansion? Not so much IMO. I love and use my 5D4 alongside the EOS-R but I prefer mirrorless. When the R5 gets here the go to will be the EOS-R and the R5.


There is no ILC market expansion!


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> And that is your opinion and you are welcome to it. I will keep trying them out but don’t take them seriously yet as much of my real use involves looking through a viewfinder for hours at a time and I haven’t found one that comes close the experience of an OVF. They are different and always will be, that EVF‘s are capable of functionality impossible in an OVF isn’t the point, that OVF’s are capable of things that EVF’s are not is. No EVF will ever be able to stay on for hours and not use any battery power, no EVF will ever have zero lag...



You have a valid use case that I think many photographers of rare or hard to photograph animals can relate to. That said I do think an EVF with zero perceived lag is very possible and only a matter of time but the use case of using little or no power is a tough nut to crack. 

One area I am hoping the early reviews will look at is powering the R5/R6 with PD powerbanks from companies like Anker. While I do not have same requirement to look through a OVF/EVF for hours I do want to be able to run some extreme time-lapses and my EOS R just never was able to because of battery life. The 2 Anker PD powerbanks I have charge the EOS R just fine but will not power the R. I hope this has been changed for the R5/R6.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

RobbieHat said:


> LOL. Certainly not with all the drama that surrounds the CEO, but the idea of a platform that improves significantly overtime via SW updates is intriguing. It has certainly thrown the auto industry into a tailspin and has been a successful platform for smartphones for some time. Could be an interesting approach for cameras as well. At least to extend a platform's life or offer add-ons as a subscription fee (SW defined ND filters, different SW defined low pass filters for different use cases (astro, landscape, studio (fabric), wildlife, etc.). Different or customizable image cropping sizes. The list goes on and on.



Their quality ratings are in the toilet - that's where I as going. Good battery bolted to a pile of junk IMO.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

HenryL said:


> What company is still putting out modern SLRs that is not sometime in the near future going to abandon them as well?












Why Pentax is Making the Right Call in Sticking with DSLRs


As the majority of camera manufacturers move away from the SLR type cameras and start producing mirrorless systems, one company continues to hold on to




petapixel.com





And I don't know medium format platforms at all, but I would imagine they, too have some folks that are harumph-ing at the death of the mirror.

SLRs will become niche over time, I agree, but not every manufacturer wants to make the massive investment just to climb into now piranha-filled waters of a mirrorless marketplace. Only the largest companies will survive that winnowing process.

- A


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> OVF’s are on no more thin ice than film cameras. There are millions of them out there and millions more bargain lenses as the majority transition to MILC’s, but they work perfectly and unlike film cameras they don’t rely on anything else. 120Hz might be better than 60Hz, but many users will never transition fully or even partially to battery hungry EVF’s. Who cares if there isn’t another generation of OVF cameras? I don’t, I know and fully accept the limitations in my image making are my own, not because I don’t have more FPS, an EVF, RF lenses, eye tracking etc etc.



The argument isn't about existing gear, it's about "why isn't Canon going to make new cameras with OVF?"


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> By the end of 2021 you may only find them used.




Umm, didn't Canon's last film camera have an *eighteen *year production run?

If there will be no 5D5, the 5D4 production lifecycle just got _extended_, one would think.

- A


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Jul 20, 2020)

Colorado said:


> The decisions to develop (or not develop) a particular camera model likely happens years in advance of release. The rumor even states the decision was made "some time ago". So the decision wasn't made based on R5 presales numbers. This is where the oft-disparaged executives make their money. They have to decide a high level strategy direction based on very fuzzy data. Meaning their market analysis showed the R5 would be feature complete enough for it to make sense to discontinue the 5D line. Some may call that a gamble but in terms of bringing a product to market (any complex product, not just cameras) it is just how businesses are forced to operate.


Yeah, I don't necessarily disagree with you - it was the timing of the 'leak/rumour' I would raise an eyebrow too, rather than timing of any decision re a 5Dv.
Cheers


----------



## David_E (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> _There will be no direct DSLR successor for the EOS 5D Mark IV._


Absolutely no surprise there.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> And that is your opinion and you are welcome to it. I will keep trying them out but don’t take them seriously yet as much of my real use involves looking through a viewfinder for hours at a time and I haven’t found one that comes close the experience of an OVF. They are different and always will be, that EVF‘s are capable of functionality impossible in an OVF isn’t the point, that OVF’s are capable of things that EVF’s are not is. No EVF will ever be able to stay on for hours and not use any battery power, no EVF will ever have zero lag...



The battery life is an issue but it's solved through having multiple batteries. Not ideal but works.

EVF lag at 120fps is 0.0083s. It's 10-20 times less than typical human reaction time. At 120fps it makes the reaction worse by 5-10%. But if you shoot in bursts it doesn't matter, you just need to start a burst upfront.

I've shot concerts/action, looking through the OVF for hours. It causes me neck pain unless I adjust a monopod or my own position very carefully. But even if my neck is ok I get a sore eye. It's not so good to use only one eye for hours. So this point comes down to very specific individual preferences. Next time maybe I'll try LCD/LiveView for action on the R5 and its allegedly fantastic autofocus, but there will be no opportunities till the end of the year due to corona.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

Fran Decatta said:


> Having in mind all the DSLR limitations, I wonder why people still wanting to have a Reflex in his hands. Yeah, the battery can work for longer, and you see the image through a real mirror and feel how it takes the photo... but in low light situations MLC focus better, almost have no limitations on the frame, you can see histogram and the final exposure on the viewfinder, IBIS, totally silent shutter and faster... I would be glad to hear the reasons of anyone to still preferring a DSLR over those R5 and R6 bodies.




If you are in a studio, or always shooting with speedlites, with AF assist, etc. do you really care about low light performance?

Mirrorless offers more for a lot of folks, but for some, that which is new isn't a big deal to how/what they shoot. So the return on investment is not justified. They may just sit on what they have until Canon gives them an improvement in the platform they prefer to use.

- A


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

RobbieHat said:


> I too shoot birds and astro with the 5DSR and it is not ideal for either. Too slow for BIF and rarely locks focus (much less acquires focus) when I shoot birds. When it hits it is awesome. Great detail and ability to crop without significant loss of resolution. But it is frustrating for moving subjects. As for astro, I just used it last night on comet and MW. Too much noise and inability to handle higher ISO. As a result, I have to pair it with super fast UWA Sigma lenses to get decent shots.
> 
> I will happily replace my 5DSR for all the improvements the R5 promises for my style of shooting. I might also add the high MP body for landscape work when it is introduced but will likely give that one some time to understand what tradeoffs come with so many MP and if it is more of a studio beast or will work well in the wild.
> 
> Bob


For astro I use my 5D4. I agree with you 100% regarding the noise of 5DsR on this but since I have 5D4....
For birding I use it mostly for static subjects (and even with 2XIII with my 500mmII). But in the past I had used it with BIF (5DsR+500II no TC of course) with very satisfactory results. The same with 400mm DOII...


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> [..]
> 
> 1) There are some niggling issues that make that spec sheet seem a tad less shiny. 12/20 fps coming with major baggage depending on what is turned on, we've seen the recording time vs heat information, etc. 12 bit RAW for stills in some of the more demanding modes might also be a letdown for some.​[..]​



12fps mode is 13-bit according to the spec sheet on the Canon USA site. You need to drop down to 8fps to get 14-bit.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> I think body size has still got to shake out over time. What makes sense to me is 1. For those wanting a minimalist body, you go for the M-System. 2. For those who mount pickle jars, supertelephotos, or who want body heat sinks for longer video recordings. — well we will have to see where that goes, but somewhat bigger than R would work for me.




But Canon has already chosen, it appears. 

[Don't make it too big and scare away the 'mirrorless is all about being small' crowd] + [internal economies of scale for recycling a common form factor, common batteries, common panel displays, common batteries, buttons, wheels, etc.] appears to be winning out over the old SLR grip/body size model.

...which is a very Sony thing to do. Canon is swallowing its pride here to some degree.

- A


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> *...to you*. Agree with most of your points, but to answer your question:
> 
> _"Why would a person switch their entire system - not just body, lenses and flashes and everything else - just to avoid Canon mirrorless?"_​
> The answer might be:
> ...



Well, more power to them I suppose, but I think my point stands...this is a five-figure change for a professional or a gear-collecting amateur. As for "principally mechanical devices" - the idea that the 5D MK IV fits this niche is laughable. That ship has sailed a long time ago, we are only talking about 1 specific component. As for ergonomics, there's a grip now for the R5, which also addresses the battery life concerns.

If a person wants to spend thousands just to avoid buying a $100 adapter and leaving it semi-permanently attached with no performance hit (and in fact, improved performance compared to whatever camera they're using now, on all accounts), then that's their right, but I'm not going to say that's a "rational" decision, because it isn't.

I'm being as objective as I possibly can, but the reality for me personally is I sold my 5D MK IV ASAP to get an EOS R, and the regrets from my personal experience have only been lacking the 2nd card slot, and missing a bit of operational speed and battery life. I do also adapt 3 lenses and that is annoying, but the trade-off is full-frame AF and getting strong AF on a 2.0x + 1.4x-extended 70 - 200 f/2.8, not just weak in the center as I did with the MK IV. I'm not saying my opinion is how everyone should feel about it, but again, when I look at the problems one might legitimately have moving to the R5, they are solved better and more cheaply by moving to the IDX III than switching to Nikon for the D850.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



++++The same source adds that Canon is obviously aware of the popularity of the 5D line and the fact that there are still a lot of shooters that will prefer the DSLR experience. *The source suspects that there is some kind of development going on to appease those users, but didn’t know exactly what it was.*

A.M.: *5D4 Anniversary / Limited edition* with a fancy badge and few additional features added here and there. This may or may not include 1Dx3 LV eye AF capabilities, a somewhat higher FPS, extended life for the shutter, possibly improved video, may be.. just may be Digic10.. What else are you thinking of? sounds like we may need a new thread to discuss.


----------



## preppyak (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> But this presumes that:
> 
> 1) 5D users won't leave to another company that is still putting out modern SLRs.


This one is pretty easy, because no major company is putting their eggs in full-frame SLR. Nikon probably released the last major full-frame DSLR for quite some time with the D780, and if you were leaving the Canon ecosystem right now, I think itd be really, really weird to decide F-Mount is the smart future-proof approach.

Canon's biggest threat was people leaving them for Sony, etc. They finally released cameras that address that threat, and they've done it in a way that makes it really cost effective to stay in their ecosystem (by having far and away the best adapter to make EF lenses work). Someone may still decide they want the A7RIV over an R5, but, that choice will no longer be because of the laughable gulf between the EOS R and the A7RIV.

Basically, the choice was always going to be between upsetting some long-term users who are highly unlikely to find an alternative beyond keeping their current cameras (and who in a few years will inevitably have to upgrade), and losing users who are not likely to come back even when Canon did make an elite camera (because the cost of switching to Sony then back to Canon is way too high to justify it). Pretty easy choice


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> And I don't know medium format platforms at all



Hasselblad, Fuji, Phase One - they are and were all mirrorless.


----------



## arbitrage (Jul 20, 2020)

I owned every 5 series from 5D2 to present but I'd never even consider buying another 5D after enjoying the MILC benefits over the past 2.5 years. For sure there would be many who still would but I think Canon is making the right move to end it here (if this rumor is correct).


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> EVF lag at 120fps is 0.0083s. It's 10-20 times less than typical human reaction time. At 120fps it makes the reaction worse by 5-10%. But if you shoot in bursts it doesn't matter, you just need to start a burst upfront.




Aren't pro PC gamers asking for way faster than even that with input lag, monitor lag, etc.? Why would wildlifers be any different? Wouldn't some want to nail the decisive moment and not necessarily rely on having the machine gun going throughout a window of possible activity?

I hear you, though, I personally don't need some absurd 300 Hz refresh to do what I do... but some folks may be chasing a more perfectly realtime experience.

- A


----------



## TMHKR (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> True. Also they say Pentax is sticking to DSLR for now.


Pentax just waits for everyone else to stop producing DSLRs, to become a single dedicated DSLR manufacturer. Sounds fine to me, although I always hated Pentax's dedication to a hybrid mechanical/electronic mount. I believe Pentax should've gone full electronic mount, like Canon's EF.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 20, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> The argument isn't about existing gear, it's about "why isn't Canon going to make new cameras with OVF?"


You argue about what you want, I’ll make the points I want.

As to your argument my point would be this, Canon don’t give a damn about yours or my photography, or indeed photography in general, they need to make money and if they can make money making more DSLR’s they will, if they don’t believe they can they won’t. It’s a simple and obvious unemotional financial decision that we as individual customers have no say in. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a 5D V, I wouldn’t be surprised if there wasn’t.


----------



## sanj (Jul 20, 2020)

Predictable news.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> ++++The same source adds that Canon is obviously aware of the popularity of the 5D line and the fact that there are still a lot of shooters that will prefer the DSLR experience. *The source suspects that there is some kind of development going on to appease those users, but didn’t know exactly what it was.*







I KNEW IT

- A


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> [..]
> EVF lag at 120fps is 0.0083s. It's 10-20 times less than typical human reaction time. At 120fps it makes the reaction worse by 5-10%. But if you shoot in bursts it doesn't matter, you just need to start a burst upfront.
> [..]


That's inter-frame lag, not the lag from sensor to EVF. To use an analogy, it's nice that harbours can load and unload 120 containers per second from a ship, but there's still the 2 week ocean trip in between.


----------



## amorse (Jul 20, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> ++++The same source adds that Canon is obviously aware of the popularity of the 5D line and the fact that there are still a lot of shooters that will prefer the DSLR experience. *The source suspects that there is some kind of development going on to appease those users, but didn’t know exactly what it was.*
> 
> A.M.: *5D4 Anniversary / Limited edition* with a fancy badge and few additional features added here and there. This may or may not include 1Dx3 LV eye AF capabilities, a somewhat higher FPS, extended life for the shutter, possibly improved video, may be.. just may be Digic10.. What else are you thinking of? sounds like we may need a new thread to discuss.


Just chuck in the R5 sensor, and call it a day - I bet plenty would buy that!


----------



## koch1948 (Jul 20, 2020)

I purchased the EOS-1D X Mark III with a 4-year extended warranty. It is a great camera body, and I am happy with my decision to stick with the 1D series. Now I can continue to use all of my EF lenses natively, and I can take my time before rushing into the new system and purchasing RF lenses. 

I was originally thinking about switching from my old 1DXII to the 5DV. However, I assumed Canon would not offer the EOS 5D Mark V. It turned out that my guess was correct.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2020)

slclick said:


> Your signature is stuff of legends



As is yours!


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> Just chuck in the R5 sensor, and call it a day - I bet plenty would buy that!




30 x 7 = 210

210 / 45 = 4.7 fps

So maaaaaybe, but that's just a 5DS2 with less pixels and better base ISO.

Throw in the DIGIC X, IBIS and a tilty-flippy and now you are talking. 

- A


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 20, 2020)

Not surprised in the least.


----------



## slclick (Jul 20, 2020)

As 5D users made up for the majority of higher end lens sales, they must now believe the R5 users will take over that position. A body is just one sale, the many L series pieces of glass you put in front of it is the real profit cashcow.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> I agree that sunsetting the 5D right now seems off. I had always (maybe erroneously) thought the 5D series was a big piece of Canon's bread and butter, and messing with a formula that works seems to me to be a a very un-Canon thing to do. That makes me think that if this is legit, then either Canon are truly changing philosophy or truly think that this body _is_ a spiritual successor to the 5D series and that current 5D users will see that if they try it.
> 
> It's a huge gamble though. What if Canon's bet is off base, and those working professionals *demand* that OVF and will not cough up for a 1DXIII - do they look to a Nikon D850 even though it's a bit old(ish), or do they snap up some cheap 5D IVs for the next 4 years until they're ready to transition? I'm sure canon's internal numbers give insight int buying behaviour, but no-matter how you slice it, killing off the 5D for anything is a massive leap. Maybe their numbers suggested the 1D users would jump ship if that transition was too abrupt (hence the decision for another 1-series) where the 5D users were more accepting.
> 
> I need to get one of these R5's in my grubby little hands to get a real feel for this!



One thing to bear in mind also is lenses. Maybe the margins on lenses are higher? A 5D5 buyer won't be getting any RF glass, and maybe the numbers stack in such as way that this is an unacceptable outcome for Canon. Of course an R buyer doesn't need to get RF lenses, but there's a good chance most of them eventually will.



ahsanford said:


> I'm guessing, however, 5-series owners buy a TON of EF glass, speedlites, transmitters, grips, etc. That's ultimately what Canon seems to be gambling here (were this to be a CR3). There's surely more money for them selling the pricier RF lenses to the 5D camp, but that's only if they migrate like obedient serfs. Some may buck and defer upgrading their bodies, run to Nikon, etc.



Finally someone mentions lenses etc. But of course a 5D4 owner looking to upgrade might not buy any new speedlights, lenses etc if they get a 5D5 because they presumably already own what they need, and if no new EF lenses are released (which is a big if), then there's nothing to upgrade to.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> You argue about what you want, I’ll make the points I want.
> 
> As to your argument my point would be this, Canon don’t give a damn about yours or my photography, or indeed photography in general, they need to make money and if they can make money making more DSLR’s they will, if they don’t believe they can they won’t. It’s a simple and obvious unemotional financial decision that we as individual customers have no say in. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a 5D V, I wouldn’t be surprised if there wasn’t.



It's not about what "I" think, the thread itself is about the prospect of Canon not manufacturing a 5D MK V (or other future gear), and your whole comment was about other equipment that already exists in the field...no need to be so aggro about it. I agree with you that the point is money, there's just no relevance in comparing gear in the field to what they might or should make in the future when talking financials.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2020)

Fran Decatta said:


> Having in mind all the DSLR limitations, I wonder why people still wanting to have a Reflex in his hands. Yeah, the battery can work for longer, and you see the image through a real mirror and feel how it takes the photo... but in low light situations MLC focus better, almost have no limitations on the frame, you can see histogram and the final exposure on the viewfinder, IBIS, totally silent shutter and faster... I would be glad to hear the reasons of anyone to still preferring a DSLR over those R5 and R6 bodies.



Ergonomics is one - MILCs are smaller, though they needn't be, and some of us still hope they'll release larger bodies in future - with larger lenses, handheld in particular. The superteles are getting smaller, but there is a lower limit to how big a 600mm f/4 can be.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

scyrene said:


> One thing to bear in mind also is lenses. Maybe the margins on lenses are higher? A 5D5 buyer won't be getting any RF glass, and maybe the numbers stack in such as way that this is an unacceptable outcome for Canon.




Which is why you sell a 5D# for $3500 and you sell an R# for $3k*. 

*A bad proposal here because of the whole 8K industry first action happening with the R5, but I'm guessing you take my point: incentivize migration, but don't mandate it. 'Here is your last 5D SLR, gang. We're charging through the nose for it, so please get with the program and migrate, eh?'

- A


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2020)

RobbieHat said:


> I too shoot birds and astro with the 5DSR and it is not ideal for either. Too slow for BIF and rarely locks focus (much less acquires focus) when I shoot birds. When it hits it is awesome. Great detail and ability to crop without significant loss of resolution. But it is frustrating for moving subjects. As for astro, I just used it last night on comet and MW. Too much noise and inability to handle higher ISO. As a result, I have to pair it with super fast UWA Sigma lenses to get decent shots.



Normalised the 5DsR is no noisier at high ISO than other Canon sensors of its era. Remember, you are magnifying the noise more if you view 100%.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Ergonomics is one - MILCs are smaller, though they needn't be, and some of us still hope they'll release larger bodies in future - with larger lenses, handheld in particular. The superteles are getting smaller, but there is a lower limit to how big a 600mm f/4 can be.




And these RF f/1.2 primes and f/2 zooms aren't exactly made of styrofoam.

Give us a damn huge chunky grip. 'Mirrorless is all about being small' clearly lost the argument: the new platform is flooded with heavy pro glass and there's nary a pancake in sight two years in.

- A


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2020)

I'm less upset than I would have been six months ago. The recent product announcements/releases are quite compelling, although a few issues (like ergonomics of smaller body size, how good the EVFs really are, etc) leave me cautious. If the 90D had dropped in price by an appreciable amount since release, I'd still be tempted to get one for its pixel density (for birds), but for other uses (macro, casual photography), the R6 offers a lot, and would be a not-too-expensive foot in the RF door. No rush though.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2020)

preppyak said:


> ...If you're Canon, what secures your future better. Producing two cameras that are functionally the same spec wise, but in different bodies, requiring two production and assembly lines or the efficiencies of scale of just one? Especially when that one product pushes people to purchase new lenses as well.



What if that one product causes people to stop buying, delay purchases or switch brands? What if it prompts a new competitor to develop a less expensive, better spec'd clone? This all seems like a risky strategy to me.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> But Canon has already chosen, it appears.
> 
> [Don't make it too big and scare away the 'mirrorless is all about being small' crowd] + [internal economies of scale for recycling a common form factor, common batteries, common panel displays, common batteries, buttons, wheels, etc.] appears to be winning out over the old SLR grip/body size model.
> 
> ...


What you are talking about is a moment in time. I am talking the long game over several generations of cameras.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> And maybe Canon could go out of business. They are going to make business decisions based on their marketing research and Knowledge of the industry and technologies.


Isn't that the same thing as letting buyers (the market) decide?


----------



## amorse (Jul 20, 2020)

scyrene said:


> One thing to bear in mind also is lenses. Maybe the margins on lenses are higher? A 5D5 buyer won't be getting any RF glass, and maybe the numbers stack in such as way that this is an unacceptable outcome for Canon. Of course an R buyer doesn't need to get RF lenses, but there's a good chance most of them eventually will.
> 
> Finally someone mentions lenses etc. But of course a 5D4 owner looking to upgrade might not buy any new speedlights, lenses etc if they get a 5D5 because they presumably already own what they need, and if no new EF lenses are released (which is a big if), then there's nothing to upgrade to.


I agree 100%. I'm sure the lens strategy is a big part of the reason Canon is undertaking this effort - it's maybe one of Canon's strategies to encourage people moving over, and creating some more revenue options by getting people to buy focal lengths they already own.

I mean, they stopped development of new EF lenses, developed a new line with lenses which aren't possible on EF, and added the additional control ring. Essentially, using RF lenses becomes unique compared to EF on an EF body - you need to migrate for that experience. Also, making EF work well on RF bodies convinces people that getting into the ecosystem doesn't mean turning over their lens collection, but lots of those people may still buy new RF lenses focal lengths they already own, so at the end of the day Canon's lens sales may jump for some time as people move over. Consider the EF/RF zoom lens clones - most of the RF versions have an advantage in some manner - 16-35 f/2.8? upgrade to 15mm and add IS. 24-70 f/2.8? Add IS. 70-200? make it tiny by comparison. For me, everyone one of those is more attractive in RF than EF. I own all those focal lengths in EF, but if I jumped into an R5 I'd be looking at all of those.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2020)

HenryL said:


> What company is still putting out modern SLRs that is not sometime in the near future going to abandon them as well? ...



I can think of at least one Korean and one Chinese company that makes lenses that might be working on cloning Canon DSLRs even as we speak.


----------



## geffy (Jul 20, 2020)

D stands for Dodo


----------



## Colorado (Jul 20, 2020)

unfocused said:


> What if that one product causes people to stop buying, delay purchases or switch brands? What if it prompts a new competitor to develop a less expensive, better spec'd clone? This all seems like a risky strategy to me.


As I mentioned earlier, both strategies are risky. Spending R&D dollars, production dollars, marketing dollars, etc on a 5DV that only a smaller subset will buy (because some portion of the market will have switched to a R5) is risky. Those 5DV purchasers include some people that would have switched do an R5 if not 5DV was available so you are cannibalizing R5 sales by making a 5DV. The expectation is that all R5 purchasers will (at different rates) start buying RF lenses.

The question of when Canon made the full DSLR to mirrorless switch was a question of when not if. You can argue it should have been after the 5DV. Canon (we can be sure) did market research and decided it was after the 1DMarkIII. Both choices have risk involved. As a company you do what research you can and make what you think is the best choice with the data that you have. Hindsight analysis may prove you made a bad decision but you can't tell that years before when you have to actually make the decision. The "just produce everything and keep everyone happy forever" answer is not always the right one.

This is happening now with performance cars where manual transmissions and (in the not too distant future) combustion engines are being phased out for electric. As someone that loves rowing gears manually while hearing the rumble of a push rod V8 that makes me sad. But my personal sadness isn't going to stop it from being the right business decision.


----------



## PhotoGenerous (Jul 20, 2020)

slclick said:


> As 5D users made up for the majority of higher end lens sales, they must now believe the R5 users will take over that position. A body is just one sale, the many L series pieces of glass you put in front of it is the real profit cashcow.



That’s me. (Hobbiest that’s done a single wedding and occasional family or other portrait sessions.) I pretty much have every Canon lens you could want besides the super telephotos that are on a whole different pricepoint level. I preordered the R5, already am getting three L lenses (and for the first time figuring out which EF lenses to sell).

I’ve e been hearing how DSLRs were dead ever since I first started researching what system to get into seven or eight years ago. I’ve been waiting for Canon, and I’m now on board with the R5 and will likely end up getting most RF lenses that come out.

I‘m still going to keep a 7DII and one 5DIV, but as more and more RF equivalents get released, I’m probably going to keep swapping out th EF versions, and maybe be left with only the tilt shift lenses, 1x-5x macro, and the 70-200 2.8 in the end.

I feel like people who want a 5DV are probably smarter about how they spend their money, whereas I love technology and collecting things alongside the art and craft of photography.


----------



## Tom W (Jul 20, 2020)

Interesting....

Part of me wants a 5D Mk V, but with the R5 coming out, and assuming it's as good as it sounds, I probably would opt to stick with the mirrorless over the 5 series DSLR at this point.


----------



## geffy (Jul 20, 2020)

infared said:


> How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?


its not just that if you check the dxo figures then a lot of lenses do not resolve enough pixels even on a dslr, the new rf lenses should have more resolving power for the new sensors


----------



## slclick (Jul 20, 2020)

schiueva said:


> I don’t know about R5. But on eosr Most EF glass is not as sharp as the R glass at the corner. The performance is similar to me.


These are two very different things.


----------



## HenryL (Jul 20, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I can think of at least one Korean and one Chinese company that makes lenses that might be working on cloning Canon DSLRs even as we speak.



Even if that were true...and I have zero reason to believe it is, I would continue to use existing 5D4's if that were what my business relied on. If you were a business owner, which is the scenario I put forth, would you rather switch to an unproven product/entity for all your photography business, or continue using proven gear that works day in and day out and is still currently available for purchase?

Edit: just to add for clarity - if someone did create something like you described it would not necessarily be a bad thing - I'm just saying that from a business perspective reliability carries lots of weight. Those users don't tend to upgrade as much as hobbyists. I get a new camera when I want one, my photographer friends get new camera's when they need them for one reason or another. Critical difference.


----------



## Tom W (Jul 20, 2020)

I do kind of wonder, though, if they couldn't come out with a parallel body to the R5, kind of like the 90D and the M-6 Mk II share a lot of technology. Then the question is, will it sell...


----------



## gbc (Jul 20, 2020)

Wonder how this is going to affect the market for used 5D mkIV's. Currently debating selling mine or my EOS R to finance the R5 purchase, and the 5D is still selling for more than the R.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

unfocused said:


> What if that one product causes people to stop buying, delay purchases or switch brands? What if it prompts a new competitor to develop a less expensive, better spec'd clone? This all seems like a risky strategy to me.




I'm opposed to no 5D5 being offered, but I concede what others have said. It's less risky than it looks. Who will steal Canon's lunch for doing this? 

Sony? With Alpha? No. Zero chance.​​Pentax? Not enough glass to plausibly pull this off.​​Nikon? A spec monster supercamera D850 didn't make a dent in competitive share, did it? They are the obvious threat, but the Nation of Nikonia is somewhat on fire and falling apart right now.​​I'm not saying elimiating the 5D5 is utterly without risk. I just don't see a heavyweight making a major play to court those that would be ruffled by this.

- A


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 20, 2020)

Ramage said:


> ...
> One area I am hoping the early reviews will look at is powering the R5/R6 with PD powerbanks from companies like Anker. While I do not have same requirement to look through a OVF/EVF for hours I do want to be able to run some extreme time-lapses and my EOS R just never was able to because of battery life. The 2 Anker PD powerbanks I have charge the EOS R just fine but will not power the R. I hope this has been changed for the R5/R6.



I've spent a lot of time figuring this stuff out, as I put cameras out in the woods for days/weeks at a time. The R would charge, but not run at the same time with the battery. The R5 is said to run AND charge on battery, which is very exciting for me. The limitation, I've found over time across systems, is the firmware of the batteries tend to shut them off when they don't draw after a while. So when your critter comes in front of the camera and triggers it, the battery is off until someone comes by and presses the button again. There are a few that don't do this. Tethertools' Case Relay product usually fixes this, but is oddly finicky and sometimes doesn't. It actually sends a wake signal in both directions when needed. If you're minding the camera yourself, you won't need to worry about this sort of thing.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2020)

RobbieHat said:


> I too shoot birds and astro with the 5DSR and it is not ideal for either. Too slow for BIF and rarely locks focus (much less acquires focus) when I shoot birds. When it hits it is awesome. Great detail and ability to crop without significant loss of resolution. But it is frustrating for moving subjects. As for astro, I just used it last night on comet and MW. Too much noise and inability to handle higher ISO. As a result, I have to pair it with super fast UWA Sigma lenses to get decent shots.
> 
> I will happily replace my 5DSR for all the improvements the R5 promises for my style of shooting. I might also add the high MP body for landscape work when it is introduced but will likely give that one some time to understand what tradeoffs come with so many MP and if it is more of a studio beast or will work well in the wild.
> 
> Bob


The 5DSR works fine for me for BIF, not as good as the D850, admittedly, and it locks on very fast. What AF settings are you using. I use the central 9 points. It even works reasonably well with the 100-400mm II +1.4xTC using the centre and helper points at f/8. Here is a selection taken on 6 Aug last year with the 5DSR + 100-400mm II on Darwins Bay and Genovese in the Galapagos, with different types of shots from a tiny Storm Petrel, a diving pelican, boobies, frigate bird and a tropical bird belting across the sky. These aren't rare keepers, most of my shots were keepers. I have posted loads more in the BIF thread here.


----------



## HenryL (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Why Pentax is Making the Right Call in Sticking with DSLRs
> 
> 
> As the majority of camera manufacturers move away from the SLR type cameras and start producing mirrorless systems, one company continues to hold on to
> ...


Another note - thanks for that link. Interesting quick read and some good points. Never been a fan of Pentax myself, but I know a couple folks back in the day that did and swore by them. I do hope things work out for them.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

geffy said:


> its not just that if you check the dxo figures then a lot of lenses do not resolve enough pixels even on a dslr, the new rf lenses should have more resolving power for the new sensors




That wasn't the question -- that's the second or third time folks have talked about RF glass to answer that question. 

I think people understand that older glass isn't ideal for high res output. But the question (I think) folks are asking: do EF lenses respond and focus well on an RF adaptor, or is their pep/snappiness lost due to lag, communication, etc.?

Principally, this is a matter of AF hit rate, AF speed, etc. compared to being on an EF mount, and everyone and their mother will tell you it is a fairly seamless experience. Now we can always debate whether the 'hassle' of an adaptor is ideal or whether the opportunity of a control ring (or rear CPL) actually heightens/extends what you can do with EF glass. But I am not aware of someone using an RF adaptor and crying foul over AF hit rate or AF lock speed.

- A


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 20, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> Well, I guess no surprise with the success of the R5 but I know there will be a lot of folks who are disappointed.


What success? It's still on preorder ?


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 20, 2020)

I'm not surprised by this but I am disappointed. I'll grant I have yet to see the R5 and R6 EVFs, but every EVF I've tried to date, including an A9, feels like a VGA monitor from the 1990s. It's not just the perceptible lag and jitter which every company has focused on eliminating (yet has failed to completely eliminate). Color, contrast, DR, and detail suck. Which is why I chuckle when someone says "but an EVF shows you what your photo will look like." If that were the case I would still shoot film.

Now they have reached a point that I can work with them. And I have to admit that in tricky lighting manual exposure with an EVF on a three dial camera is probably the most natural, intuitive way to nail exposure that one can imagine. (Though less intuitive, my results are just as consistent using a spot meter on a DSLR.) Never the less I would be interested in one more generation of DSLRs. Canon hasn't even released their rumored 83mp sensor yet and I don't expect it will ever see the inside of a flappy mirror body. But I would be very interested in a 5D mark V with the R5's internals and the 1DX mark III's PDAF.

I don't normally hope that rumors on this site turn out to be false, but I am hoping that this one turns out to be false.


----------



## dichterDichter (Jul 20, 2020)

the viewfinder, the click sound and the awesome battery life is just great on dslr. but i think the future is somewhere else. but if canon would like to keep at least one, they would have to continue the ef lens developement. havent they announced to discontinue it?


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 20, 2020)

This is really a sad move from Canon. And stupid too. And somehow so careless towards their DSLR users. I understand mirrorless cameras are the future, but why making a switch like this? Why do not provide us with an overlap between similarly spec'd DSLR and mirrorless cameras so that we can compare, use both and decide how to make the transition (if ever so).
Comparing the R5 against the 5D Mark IV isn't fair imo. We needed a 5D Mark V.

And FFS Canon, can't you care about your customers who prefer an OVF?

And for those of you who prefer mirrorless cameras, good for you. But too many of you try to explain to those who prefer OVF why they're wrong. Just don't.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 20, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> Yes. I believe when I get my R5, I will probably get the control ring adapter for it and assign the aperture to it.



Most people seem to use it for ISO, but to me it seems intuitive to put the aperture there--after all you're adjusting something physically _in the lens_.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

yoms said:


> Why do not provide us with an overlap between similarly spec'd DSLR and mirrorless cameras so that we can compare, use both and decide how to make the transition (if ever so).




Yep. I expected a near-ish timeframe R5 and 5D5 and that would be it for the 5-series. One generation of overlap (or two if you equate a 5D4 sensor in the EOS R). 

Lest we forget, the 90D is having its generation of overlap right now with the M6 Mk II.

But for lesser product lines, say your bread and butter Rebels, they may not get the courtesy of an overlap. #eek #horrormusic

- A


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> EVF lag at 120fps is 0.0083s. It's 10-20 times less than typical human reaction time. At 120fps it makes the reaction worse by 5-10%. But if you shoot in bursts it doesn't matter, you just need to start a burst upfront.



Quarkcharmed, that might work for your concerts, but the problem with EVF lag is more about 
1) the cumulative delay 
2) after a series of burst shots
3) on a moving target

You need all three of those factors to see the problem. It's all fine until your viewfinder shows you the bird in the center of the frame, while the actual recorded image shows just a bill off to the left of the frame. My hope is that this short delay makes it work.

Your figure of 8.3 ms isn't the lag, but rather is the time between refreshes of the monitor in the EVF. There is another delay, which is the processing time it takes to get the image from the sensor to the EVF. We don't know what that figure is yet on the R5. If it is less than 8.3 ms, then you will not have a cumulatively larger lag in the EVF, and all is good. Traditionally, though, that has not been the case. Even with the A9II, there is enough lag so that if you have a 20fps burst for a few seconds, the last shots will be significantly behind a fast moving subject. 

Because the A9II is a beast when it comes to read-out (stacked sensor and a few other innovative things), I'm not optimistic the R5 will be better than the Sony in this one feature. Hope to be wrong. I have been on other elements where I've underestimated this body. -tig


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 20, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Isn't that the same thing as letting buyers (the market) decide?


Partially. Buyers decide what they want today based on what is available today and and a host of other factors (like opinions and measurements discussed on this forum). Manufacturers have to look into the future and plan for what they think buyers will want in the future based on the factors I mentioned and others. Sometimes they get it right and succeed and sometimes not.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Most people seem to use it for ISO, but to me it seems intuitive to put the aperture there--after all you're adjusting something physically _in the lens_.




I don't own an RF body, but I'm curious to see what people use control rings the most for.

In my mind, since I am largely an aperture priority shooter on my 5D3, I have fast dedicated dials for aperture and exposure comp. I also have a joystick for the AF point. So I'm guessing I'd use that control ring for the fourth most common thing I adjust on the fly. Either ISO or min shutter speed (when shooting in Auto ISO) certainly come to mind as potential candidates.

- A


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 20, 2020)

geffy said:


> its not just that if you check the dxo figures then a lot of lenses do not resolve enough pixels even on a dslr, the new rf lenses should have more resolving power for the new sensors



This is the main reason why I absolutely hate DXO's "perceptual megapixels" nonsense.

Resolution does not work this way. Components do not "out resolve" and cap each other in this manner. System resolution is always lower than the weakest component, but improving the strongest component will still improve the final result. An R5 with a cheap 1990s consumer zoom will still produce a better image than, say, an R6 with the same lens.

The RF mount does not have inherent advantages for lens resolution. It allows designers to use some designs, for some focal lengths, which are easier to design/produce. And in those cases you might get a sharper (or cheaper or lighter) lens. But then again someone might put so much effort into the equivalent SLR lens that they have the sharper version. And for a lot of focal lengths the design will be the same, EF or RF. You just can't go by rules of thumb here, you have to test lens vs. lens in the real world.

As for the real world, there are a lot of EF lenses that sit perfectly well on a 45/50mp sensor.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 20, 2020)

yoms said:


> This is really a sad move from Canon. And stupid too. And somehow so careless towards their DSLR users. I understand mirrorless cameras are the future, but why making a switch like this? Why do not provide us with an overlap between similarly spec'd DSLR and mirrorless cameras so that we can compare, use both and decide how to make the transition (if ever so).
> Comparing the R5 against the 5D Mark IV isn't fair imo. We needed a 5D Mark V.
> 
> And FFS Canon, can't you care about your customers who prefer an OVF?
> ...


Yes it is inevitable that some photographers will be put off by this (so far rumoured) decision. If true, Canon must have done a cost benefit analysis and decided that the benefits of moving more quickly to RF outweighed the negatives. 

Most expected that it would eventually happen, but Canon has not been clear on its timeline. Perhaps they still don't know for sure and are waiting to see the market response over a longer period of time for the new cameras.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I'm not butt hurt or screaming into a pillow or anything. _My _next camera will be mirrorless, personally.
> 
> But I am not one of the army of working professionals at weddings toting a 5D today. I think saying goodbye to that brand that quickly would be a mistake, but I don't have Canon's internal numbers to say 'See, look how many there are!'.
> 
> - A



I think Canon are quietly confident that the R5 is going to be a better camera for shooting weddings than the 5DV would have been. Yes, photographers will need to learn to adjust to using mirrorless properly, but they will if they want to remain competitive. 

I'm certainly biased because I prefer mirrorless to DSLR technology (and having gone from EOS 1000FN->EOS 300D -> EOS 500D -> EOS 20D -> EOS 40D -> EOS 5D Mark III -> EOS 5DSR I think I've had enough experience of DSLR to be able to have a fair opinion on this.)

There are clear worries about battery life, but adding a grip and having a pocket-full of LP-E6Ns will resolve this. I don't even bother with a grip, I very rarely run out of juice even on a single battery. Last friday (the day I went out with both cameras) I took 1440 shots on the EOS R with a single battery.


----------



## PhotoGenerous (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I don't own an RF body, but I'm curious to see what people use control rings the most for.
> 
> In my mind, since I am largely an aperture priority shooter on my 5D3, I have fast dedicated dials for aperture and exposure comp. I also have a joystick for the AF point. So I'm guessing I'd use that control ring for the fourth most common thing I adjust on the fly. Either ISO or min shutter speed (when shooting in Auto ISO) certainly come to mind as potential candidates.
> 
> - A



Minimum shutter speed! That excites me a lot more than ISO. That’s something I’d like to adjust more often, but it was a hassle.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 20, 2020)

AEWest said:


> Yes it is inevitable that some photographers will be put off by this (so far rumoured) decision. If true, Canon must have done a cost benefit analysis and decided that the benefits of moving more quickly to RF outweighed the negatives.



I have no doubt that the general collapse of the ILC market and the global pandemic have had an impact on this. In a healthier market we probably would see a few more DSLRs.



> Most expected that it would eventually happen, but Canon has not been clear on its timeline. Perhaps they still don't know for sure and are waiting to see the market response over a longer period of time for the new cameras.



I'm certain this is also true. Depending on feedback Canon may yet decide to produce a 5D mark V, though I'm guessing the odds are against it.


----------



## amorse (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I don't own an RF body, but I'm curious to see what people use control rings the most for.
> 
> In my mind, since I am largely an aperture priority shooter on my 5D3, I have fast dedicated dials for aperture and exposure comp. I also have a joystick for the AF point. So I'm guessing I'd use that control ring for the fourth most common thing I adjust on the fly. Either ISO or min shutter speed (when shooting in Auto ISO) certainly come to mind as potential candidates.
> 
> - A


I don't have one either, but I've been trying to imagine how I'd customize as well. The piece that I find interesting, is the R5/6 seem to have 2 more dials than I'm used to coming from an 5DIV.

You have the one behind the shutter button (shutter speed for me), the one by the set button on the back (aperture usually), and then you pick up a dial surrounding the mode button on the R5/or just another dial alone on the R6, then you have the control ring on the lenses. Honestly, I'd be pretty happy just getting to three dials so I don't need to hit ISO before changing the setting every time, but sure, I'll take 4.


----------



## sanj (Jul 20, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I think Canon are quietly confident that the R5 is going to be a better camera for shooting weddings than the 5DV would have been. Yes, photographers will need to learn to adjust to using mirrorless properly, but they will if they want to remain competitive.
> 
> I'm certainly biased because I prefer mirrorless to DSLR technology (and having gone from EOS 1000FN->EOS 300D -> EOS 500D -> EOS 20D -> EOS 40D -> EOS 5D Mark III -> EOS 5DSR I think I've had enough experience of DSLR to be able to have a fair opinion on this.)
> 
> There are clear worries about battery life, but adding a grip and having a pocket-full of LP-E6Ns will resolve this. I don't even bother with a grip, I very rarely run out of juice even on a single battery. Last friday (the day I went out with both cameras) I took 1440 shots on the EOS R with a single battery.


What would be the 'learn to adjust to mirrorless'? It would be nice to list these.


----------



## sanj (Jul 20, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> *I have no doubt that the general collapse of the ILC market and the global pandemic have had an impact on this. In a healthier market we probably would see a few more DSLRs. *Naa.. It was time.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm certain this is also true. Depending on feedback Canon may yet decide to produce a 5D mark V, though I'm guessing the odds are against it.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 20, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> Your figure of 8.3 ms isn't the lag, but rather is the time between refreshes of the monitor in the EVF. There is another delay, which is the processing time it takes to get the image from the sensor to the EVF. We don't know what that figure is yet on the R5. If it is less than 8.3 ms, then you will not have a cumulatively larger lag in the EVF, and all is good. Traditionally, though, that has not been the case. Even with the A9II, there is enough lag so that if you have a 20fps burst for a few seconds, the last shots will be significantly behind a fast moving subject.



Bingo. Refresh lag is not what people are complaining about (any more) when they complain about EVF lag. What's the lag from the moment the photons hit the sensor until that specific frame is painted onto the EVF? And how far does it drift over time during burst shooting?

I simply cannot track as well or as effortlessly with an EVF as I can with an OVF.


----------



## sanj (Jul 20, 2020)

For those who like the mark IV: It works great and they can continue to use it. What does it lack?


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 20, 2020)

sanj said:


> Naa.. It was time.



There is no "time" for a switchover. Everything for a corporation is a question of profitability. If a profitable segment demanded flappy mirrors for the next 100 years, then 100 years is how much longer there would be 5D bodies with flappy mirrors.

As evidenced by this thread, not everybody is happy with EVFs all the time. If times were good, more people would be buying, meaning more people who still want another 5D iteration...boom, profitable, done.

But times aren't good.


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jul 20, 2020)

So much talk about not getting a 5D5 but so little talk about what the OVF product in development might be. If it's taking any length of time to develop, then we can expect something novel:


An DSLR with a switch-flip to locks up the mirror and pops up an EVF in the viewfinder. Because right now the biggest drawback of the 1DX3 is having to use the rear screen in live view to get mirrorless-level AF performance.
Perhaps they have developed a way to physically mirror the light up to an OVF while still retaining the short RF mount – and they add to that the pop-up EVF for a complete hybrid R1 experience.
Not saying either of these options will happen, but it's sure more fun than crying over the 5D5.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 20, 2020)

sanj said:


> For those who like the mark IV: It works great and they can continue to use it. What does it lack?



45mp sensor, 192 pt AF, full frame 4k 60p. I'd list 8k 30p...and a 5D V with R5 internals would no doubt get that...but I'm not sure that's a critical one.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> 45mp sensor, 192 pt AF, full frame 4k 60p. I'd list 8k 30p...and a 5D V with R5 internals would no doubt get that...but I'm not sure that's a critical one.


Also what it has, rather than lacks, an AA-filter.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2020)

1Dx sR anyone?


----------



## dak3 (Jul 20, 2020)

If Canon decides to abandon pro DSLRs for the sake of claimed 'modernity', then I say "Canon, get lost with your sub-par EVF expensive toys." You bricked your internal camera video features for years to make more money in your upper echelon systems, but you can't even make a C100 with 4:2:2 10bit internal recording (or release new unlocked firmware for former / current creators). Now, it's an R5 with claimed "amazing 8k", but a body that is amateurish for pro-photographers for the cost of $$$$! Sigh. Every time that you get close to making a camera that is one or two features away from its competitors (i.e. Nikon D850 with more focus points and no low-pass filter), you decide to abandon the progress of the current system or re-invent the wheel. Sorry for the rant, but I'm just tired of this game Canon. There is still a lot of us who want and need a system that continues to survive the elements and environment that we shoot in, tried and true, without resorting to calling us old fashioned. Do I want to shoot in the scorching sun during a photo-shoot with a pin-hole lagging EVF and rely only on AF for creative expressions? Not me. I've spent $$,$$$ in your company for over a decade, but now you're pushing RF lenses and bodies without pro-ergonomics? No thank you. I'm happy with what I have, and I'll continue to take pro-photos / video with what is tried and true without spending another penny. I'm sorry that I won't be able to provide 8K and 9K photos and video to clients because of my stubbornness. 4K and 5K will have to do with less auto features and more skill. It's already hard surviving in this market with less money to go around (photography gear investment and client budgets).


----------



## yestostills (Jul 20, 2020)

I understand technological change and user preferences as we continue to evolve into the digital age. As someone who has worked behind electronic viewfinders for 35 years as a videographer I certainly still appreciate the experience of the OVF DSLR. I'm hoping Canon realizes that there is a mass of EF optics in the world today and that they have the market and would sell well if they came out with at least one more DSLR model similar to the 5D line. Using elements from both the 1dx and R line, a sensor with a wide dynamic range would not be a major cost for production and should be able to keep the price competitive especially if the camera is photo centric. I'd buy two handily.
The other reason I'm resistant to the R5 is the price point for having the luxury of 8K video, which is nothing more than a marketing ploy. It is simply not pragmatic or practical in the line of work I and many of my professional colleagues do. I do all my work with video cameras because technically and ergonomically for work flow and management and it is what my producers and clients expect from me.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 20, 2020)

Slightly off topic but Jared Polin has just released some raw files from a production r5 on his site. Might be worth a look.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 20, 2020)

RobbieHat said:


> I too shoot birds and astro with the 5DSR and it is not ideal for either. Too slow for BIF and rarely locks focus (much less acquires focus) when I shoot birds.



Like Alan I don't have any issues with action photography, including BiF, with a 5Ds. I've shot it with the Canon 300mm f/4L IS, 100-400 mark II, and Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 G2. If your 5DsR is struggling here check settings and also consider if it's the lens.

Naturally the 1DX mark III's PDAF is superior, and Nikon's PDAF "sticks" better than Canon's iTR. (Which is a bummer because I honestly believe a firmware fix would change that.) But the PDAF system in the 5Ds is quite good.



> As for astro, I just used it last night on comet and MW. Too much noise and inability to handle higher ISO. As a result, I have to pair it with super fast UWA Sigma lenses to get decent shots.



The 5Ds/sR are roughly 0.5-0.6ev off the best FF cameras at high ISO. Seriously. High ISO differences within a format are practically a meme.

Really good Milky Way shots require fast primes or tracking on any camera. Preferably from very dark skies, otherwise trying to tease the MW out from background light pollution is going to emphasize noise.

As for NEOWISE, If you didn't catch it at its brightest point from a dark sky, then you missed the chance to shoot it with "normal" lenses. You would have needed a tracking mount for a good, telephoto NEOWISE shot last night.


----------



## mppix (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Mirrorless is the present and future for the mass market. EVF’s are a long way from replacing the abilities of OVF’s and until they can there will still be an active DSLR user base.



So is film.

When a new tech does enough things better than existing tech, it relpaces it.
Example: shoot portraits at close range at f1.2.
Also, Canon is unlikely to use 2 "main" mounts over any extended period of time.


----------



## mpmark (Jul 20, 2020)

good, my 5D4 will be worth more when I sell it.


----------



## MrToes (Jul 20, 2020)

I'm hoping for a Mark V


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 20, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Also what it has, rather than lacks, an AA-filter.



I guess that depends on how well the new AA filter works since Canon thinks the 45mp sensor is superior to the 5DsR 50mp one. I realize you're in the camp of people who would rather not have one at all. But I don't think Canon can do that without releasing two separate models, given their marketshare in wedding and fashion.

We'll see how the 45mp R5 stacks up against the AA-less 45mp sensor in the D850.


----------



## MrToes (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


I'm hoping for a Mark V


----------



## rwvaughn (Jul 20, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> Well, I guess no surprise with the success of the R5 but I know there will be a lot of folks who are disappointed.



The market made the decision.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 20, 2020)

joestopper said:


> No huge surprise. But full committment to mirrorless.
> Confirmation that Canon is convinced that the R5 will meet (and esceed) all needs of former 5DIV users.


I can understand the dilemma. As a user, I was going to do a slow transition to the R5/R6 keeping my 1dx II and EF Lenses. The more I read, I finally decided to go all in even before I saw the final specs. I still have my 100-400 II & 70-200 f4 L IS II, but sold the rest of my gear. I decided it made no sense to straddle the fence, those pickets can be painful. I will sell the 100-400 II and keep the 70-200 f4 II adapted for M6 II / R5. Love the weight, IQ and size of the 70-200 f4 II.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> I guess that depends on how well the new AA filter works since Canon thinks the 45mp sensor is superior to the 5DsR 50mp one. I realize you're in the camp of people who would rather not have one at all. But I don't think Canon can do that without releasing two separate models, given their marketshare in wedding and fashion.
> 
> We'll see how the 45mp R5 stacks up against the AA-less 45mp sensor in the D850.


The Sony trick of having a switchable filter would be useful. The 45 Mpx D850 sensor does outresolve the 5DSR and gives even less Moire. I think that it's because the 5DSR actually has an AA-filter that is then neutralised and so does not show the full potential of lacking the filter. That is probably also why the 5DS is so close in resolution in practice.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

PhotoGenerous said:


> Minimum shutter speed! That excites me a lot more than ISO. That’s something I’d like to adjust more often, but it was a hassle.




Or potentially using the control ring just to toggle on/off something you use occasionally but don't want to drill down into the menus for -- perhaps a quick on/off of Eye AF, Servo vs. One Shot, etc.?

The camera is so feature-laden and customizable I may be sounding super reductive with the knuckleheadedly simple things I plan to use the control ring for. I am guessing longer-term EOS R users figured out something better to use it for a while ago.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 20, 2020)

sanj said:


> For those who like the mark IV: It works great and they can continue to use it. What does it lack?




It lacks a lot of things, but these four (to me, as a stills shooter) are pretty huge:
​45 MP
20 fps​IBIS​tilty-flippy​
- A


----------



## Jim Corbett (Jul 20, 2020)

Which means Canon are confident the "R" line is as solid and reliable as the 5D one. They wouldn't abandon their main gold photo vein just just like that


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 20, 2020)

I'm not surprised that it won't happen, but am surprised if the decision was made very long ago. The continued drop in camera sales is taking its toll. Camera manufacturers have to tighten their belts and reduce the number of models they make. They also need a boost in sales, and they were able to do that by putting out more featured Mirrorless bodies, and thus sell the high profit RF lenses. EF lenses still work great, but RF lenses have no competition, so the profits are high. The M is the best selling mirrorless camera, so they know the potential.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 20, 2020)

preppyak said:


> ...
> Basically, the choice was always going to be between upsetting some long-term users who are highly unlikely to find an alternative beyond keeping their current cameras (and who in a few years will inevitably have to upgrade), and losing users who are not likely to come back even when Canon did make an elite camera (because the cost of switching to Sony then back to Canon is way too high to justify it). Pretty easy choice



All of the former Canon users I know who, like me, spent time in SonyLand, kept a bunch of the EF glass to use (quite easily) with the E-mount system. As a result, coming back to Canon is again pretty darned easy. The great expense of switching back has more to do with new, "bonkers-class" glass in the RF system that never existed before, that I just can't resist trying. 

Canon EF is the common currency of the camera world. I used the same 8 (mostly Sigma) lenses shooting primarily a brace of 5D Mark IVs for a couple years; then a Panasonic S1R for four months, then a bunch of Sony bodies for a year after; and now coming back to the R5. The switching costs used to be 25 percent of your whole inventory, but each time I swapped systems, I paid something closer to 5-10 percent. It helped that that I buy used whenever I can.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Umm, didn't Canon's last film camera have an *eighteen *year production run?
> 
> If there will be no 5D5, the 5D4 production lifecycle just got _extended_, one would think.
> 
> - A



I just remember the 7D2 vanishing overnight.

It was there, then it was gone.

Maybe the 5D4 will be a different story, but with the big push to mirrorless I wouldn't be surprised to see the same thing happen to the 5D4.


----------



## sanj (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> It lacks a lot of things, but these four (to me, as a stills shooter) are pretty huge:
> ​45 MP​20 fps​IBIS​tilty-flippy​
> - A


R5 has it all.


----------



## BakaBokeh (Jul 20, 2020)

What else could appease 5D users?

The Hybrid RF EF?


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon has not hesitated to merge and amend lines. The 1Dx and the 90D are both examples of that. The original 7D was what many people thought they'd get in a 60D (In fact, there was a lot of whining on this forum from people who correctly saw the 60D as downgrade from the 40D and 50D and didn't want to pay for a 7D. But it didn't stop Canon).

If this rumor is correct (and I remain skeptical) we may soon see just two full frame Canon DSLRs: the 1DX and a model that combines the 6D and 5D, similar to the 90D. (A 9D?) I could easily see a 45mp body with the basic controls/body configuration as the 90 D priced about the same or just slightly above the R6. It won't a 5D, but like the 90D it might check enough boxes to meet most people's needs, especially if it's under $2,500.

45 mp sensor
Tilt-Flip Screen
10 fps
Dual SD II slots
Same autofocus as 5DIV (Which frankly is pretty good)
Build quality somewhere between 6D and 5D, but probably slightly closer to 6D
No IBIS (This won't be a video camera)

Bonus possibilities:
Eye and Animal Eye focus
Thumb controller of the 1DX III


----------



## wockawocka (Jul 20, 2020)

RIP 5D line - Awesome wedding cameras


----------



## dolina (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


This is the business context/environment why that alleged decision was made

Camera market as a whole has had a decline in shipments for nearly 10 years straight
Smartphone has largely eaten into the camera market as a whole for the past 10 years straight
Innovations in the camera market has come to a point that there are no "must have" new feature to induce upgrades. Smartphones have taken up that role
There is no readily available and easy to apply way to amortize camera purchases over a period of 12/24/36 months like smartphones on a postpaid plan.
Olympus sold its camera division to Japan Industrial Partners (JIP)
Nikon has had a terrible 2019.
In light of these business realities it comes to no surprise that whatever little R&D money they have has been diverted to only focus on RF mount bodies, lens and accessories.

Any further development for the EF mount system makes little to no business sense as new users who will need to build up their personal camera ecosystem will prefer to buy full frame mirrorless.

Customers who have EF system have an already very mature product line of bodies, lens and accessories to chose from.

The last EF product I've bought is the 5Ds R bought over 5 years ago. I might buy the last EF body produced just for kicks within the next 5 years.

But to be honest I really wish I never bought any of my gear. Should have took up my MBA instead of wasting time photographing stupid birds.


----------



## bandido (Jul 20, 2020)

That is too bad cause the letter V (roman number 5) looks so sexy.


----------



## dak3 (Jul 20, 2020)

The Canon 5D is dead. Long live the Canon 4D Mark I !!


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Or potentially using the control ring just to toggle on/off something you use occasionally but don't want to drill down into the menus for -- perhaps a quick on/off of Eye AF, Servo vs. One Shot, etc.?
> 
> The camera is so feature-laden and customizable I may be sounding super reductive with the knuckleheadedly simple things I plan to use the control ring for. I am guessing longer-term EOS R users figured out something better to use it for a while ago.
> 
> - A


I had the EOSR in March last tear and it took a few experiments to figure the best functions for the various dials and buttons. There are so many customisable functions for each button it should be fine for anyones needs.

I finished up with the front dial for shutter speed, the rear dial for Aperture and the control ring for ISO. I turned the Touch Bar off completely as I found it more of a hinderance than a benefit.

I'm pretty sure the R6 & R5 will be the same, which is great news.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2020)

If this is true I readily admit I'm surprised. I was pretty certain that Canon would continued the 5D line indefinitely. Not the first time I would be wrong.

However, I would caution everyone that this is nothing to celebrate. If Canon has truly made the decision to walk away from the most popular full frame DSLR series ever made, it's a very bad sign for the future of the dedicated camera market. I am afraid that enthusiast and professional interchangeable lens cameras are going to get more expensive and the options available to consumers will be limited. Is the R the future of photography or is it just a "Hail Mary" pass at the end of the fourth quarter with smartphones about to drive a final nail into the coffin of the industry?


----------



## Juangrande (Jul 20, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> I did not state an opinion, but, yes I do give a lot of weight to my opinion.


Well stated


----------



## dak3 (Jul 20, 2020)

dolina said:


> Customers who have EF system have an already very mature product line of bodies, lens and accessories to chose from.
> 
> The last EF product I've bought is the 5Ds R bought over 5 years ago. I might buy the last EF body produced just for kicks within the next 5 years.
> 
> But to be honest I really wish I never bought any of my gear. Should have took up my MBA instead of wasting time photographing stupid birds.



I'm sorry that you did not enjoy investing in photography equipment to photograph stupid birds. Since our planet is literally dying, it could be argued that one day, in a not so distant future, people will be craving to experience the beauty, simplicity, calmness, and environment of birds in an attempt to desperately capture that fragile world with photography / videography once again. By then, it will be too late. Given that 200,000 Americans graduate with an MBA every year, with no guarantee of making money or being happy, one could argue that the illusion imposed by society to the individual seeking their dream to be 'successful and happy' via another expensive degree is a deceitful ploy. Happiness is all in the eye of the beholder, and for so many photographers around the world, the personal 'value' of photographing the beauty of wildlife cannot be measured equally with societal value. In the end, to each their own.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Jul 20, 2020)

tron said:


> Battery endurance is important to me and it seems that we are talking a 5 times difference! The only mitigation to this issue is the capability of R5 and R6 to be charged by a capable compatible PD battery bank.



Battery life concerns the hell out of me because of the IBIS, I would like to know if I can fully turn it off and just use EF lens IS or not. But the CIPA battery rating is a joke. It rates the M6 Mark II at something like 280 shots and I routinely get 800-1100 images every time I use that camera before the battery needs to be swapped. Then we have the EOS R! It says like 340 shots and I get upward of 2200 with the grip. I'll shoot an entire wedding day on just 2 batteries and that's something I can't even remember being able to get away with when I used my 5D4 and 5D3 - but I could be mistaken. Either way, I'm pretty confident I can get 800-1000 per battery and hopefully over 1600 with the grip.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Jul 20, 2020)

slclick said:


> Your signature is stuff of legends


LMAO!! That's the benefit of never switching from Canon, I suppose. I never had to take the hit on flipping gear and I upgraded along the way as new lenses would come out - slowly filled my bag with the lenses I wanted. I'm getting out of weddings so I'll probably be parting ways with the 24mm and 35mm primes and 24-70...maybe even the 70-200. But the rest of the gear all serve a vital role in the bag for the many hats I wear.


----------



## slclick (Jul 20, 2020)

I think the real question is whether there will be a thread named:

There will not be an EOS 5D Mark V [CR3]


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 20, 2020)

I know it won't happen, but after watching some Youtube videos of the animal eye-AF of the R5/R6 in action... I wish there could be a firmware update that would add this to the R.  I'd sell something and get an RF 800mm f/11!


----------



## Ronsw (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Also, if true, this would mean _*the beginning of the end of the chunky grip*_ for the 99% of us who don't shoot a 1-series body.
> 
> The 'mirrorless is all about being small' may have utterly lost the argument at this point (I refer you to a growing tide of awesome RF pickle jar lenses), but they did push Canon into an A7-ification of the body/grip strategy.
> 
> ...



I have a problem with Canon DLSRs without the battery grip. The are just too small. Having a smaller camera is not something I want. Yes I carry a 5D with a 70-200mm F2.8L and Speedlite 600ex for up to 9 hours a day. Don't use a strap. The weight doesn't bother me. Small grip does.


----------



## Juangrande (Jul 20, 2020)

infared said:


> How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?


According to a Canon Ambassador in their own YouTube comment thread (and further responding to my own follow up question) not as good as RF glass. They said not as sharp in their testing with lens calibration and naked eye. They had planned to keep their favorite EF lenses but decided after trying both mounts to replace with RF. Said the EF lenses were softer on the R5. I don’t know if that’s an issue of adapting the mount or if the R5 just out resolves the EF glass. I should’ve asked if it was the same with the R6. They also said the EF glass was perfectly sharp on their 5Dmk4 bodies, just soft on the R5.


----------



## Juangrande (Jul 20, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I'm not butt hurt or screaming into a pillow or anything. _My _next camera will be mirrorless, personally.
> 
> But I am not one of the army of working professionals at weddings toting a 5D today. I think saying goodbye to that brand that quickly would be a mistake, but I don't have Canon's internal numbers to say 'See, look how many there are!'.
> 
> - A


 “I’m not butt hurt or screaming into a pillow or anything...” 
I’m so stealing this quote lol.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 20, 2020)

LSXPhotog said:


> Battery life concerns the hell out of me because of the IBIS, I would like to know if I can fully turn it off and just use EF lens IS or not. But the CIPA battery rating is a joke. It rates the M6 Mark II at something like 280 shots and I routinely get 800-1100 images every time I use that camera before the battery needs to be swapped. Then we have the EOS R! It says like 340 shots and I get upward of 2200 with the grip. I'll shoot an entire wedding day on just 2 batteries and that's something I can't even remember being able to get away with when I used my 5D4 and 5D3 - but I could be mistaken. Either way, I'm pretty confident I can get 800-1000 per battery and hopefully over 1600 with the grip.



Mirrorless and CIPA ratings are interesting because a battery can last 2 shots or 1000, depends how are you measuring it and how you use it.
If you admire every new shot on the LCD for 10 minutes, you won't take many shots obviously. On a DSLR you could watch a bird in the OVF for hours with almost zero battery usage.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 20, 2020)

Juangrande said:


> According to a Canon Ambassador in their own YouTube comment thread (and further responding to my own follow up question) not as good as RF glass. They said not as sharp in their testing with lens calibration and naked eye. They had planned to keep their favorite EF lenses but decided after trying both mounts to replace with RF. Said the EF lenses were softer on the R5. I don’t know if that’s an issue of adapting the mount or if the R5 just out resolves the EF glass. I should’ve asked if it was the same with the R6. They also said the EF glass was perfectly sharp on their 5Dmk4 bodies, just soft on the R5.


I don’t believe that but even if it was verifiable fact it is a singular data point. However my main issue is Canon don’t make RF glass the same as my most popular EF glass so what choice do I personally have? Oh, and the various RF to EF adapters give me functionality EF lenses on EF camera don’t have over and above a final percentage or two of sharpness (which I believe is severely overrated as a lens metric).


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 20, 2020)

Juangrande said:


> According to a Canon Ambassador in their own YouTube comment thread (and further responding to my own follow up question) not as good as RF glass. They said not as sharp in their testing with lens calibration and naked eye. They had planned to keep their favorite EF lenses but decided after trying both mounts to replace with RF. Said the EF lenses were softer on the R5. I don’t know if that’s an issue of adapting the mount or if the R5 just out resolves the EF glass. I should’ve asked if it was the same with the R6. They also said the EF glass was perfectly sharp on their 5Dmk4 bodies, just soft on the R5.



The tests you refer to are comparing EF glass versus rough equivalent RF glass, and indeed - not surprisingly - the newer designs, with newer coatings, are superior. However, if you compare EF lenses on the 5D4 with EF lenses on the R, you'll find that the adapter makes absolutely no difference to image quality. So, the upshot is that your EF lenses will be just as good on the R. They won't magically be better, however.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 20, 2020)

unfocused said:


> If this is true I readily admit I'm surprised. I was pretty certain that Canon would continued the 5D line indefinitely. Not the first time I would be wrong.
> 
> However, I would caution everyone that this is nothing to celebrate. If Canon has truly made the decision to walk away from the most popular full frame DSLR series ever made, it's a very bad sign for the future of the dedicated camera market. I am afraid that enthusiast and professional interchangeable lens cameras are going to get more expensive and the options available to consumers will be limited. Is the R the future of photography or is it just a "Hail Mary" pass at the end of the fourth quarter with smartphones about to drive a final nail into the coffin of the industry?


Even if Canon has not come out and announced that the R5 is the next generation of the 5 series, what is the R5 missing that would be in an 5d V other than EF mount, battery life and undefined EVF latency? You also have to ask what WOULDN'T be in the 5d V as you look at the 1d III being pushed by the R5/R6 (feature and AF, not build and other 1DX unique features) . As to pricing issues, the 5dIV launched in 2016 @ $3,499 which is $3,758 in 2020 dollars. This is the currency difference and may not reflect the additional development, manufacturing and logistics factored into the additional $241 sales price. Canon has at least given us a way to bridge from the EF to R platform which doesn't always happen in other industries.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 20, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> The tests you refer to are comparing EF glass versus rough equivalent RF glass, and indeed - not surprisingly - the newer designs, with newer coatings, are superior. However, if you compare EF lenses on the 5D4 with EF lenses on the R, you'll find that the adapter makes absolutely no difference to image quality. So, the upshot is that your EF lenses will be just as good on the R. They won't magically be better, however.


Unless one is terrible with AFMA, like me, then the same glass on the R is far better.


----------



## trulandphoto (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



I'll predict a 5D Mark IV SE with updated processor and firmware, same sensor and body.


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> Even if Canon has not come out and announced that the R5 is the next generation of the 5 series, what is the R5 missing that would be in an 5d V other than EF mount, battery life and undefined EVF latency? You also have to ask what WOULDN'T be in the 5d V as you look at the 1d III being pushed by the R5/R6 (feature and AF, not build and other 1DX unique features) . As to pricing issues, the 5dIV launched in 2016 @ $3,499 which is $3,758 in 2020 dollars. This is the currency difference and may not reflect the additional development, manufacturing and logistics factored into the additional $241 sales price. Canon has at least given us a way to bridge from the EF to R platform which doesn't always happen in other industries.


You answered that yourself perfectly: An EF mount and an optical viewfinder.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> As for NEOWISE, If you didn't catch it at its brightest point from a dark sky, then you missed the chance to shoot it with "normal" lenses. You would have needed a tracking mount for a good, telephoto NEOWISE shot last night.



I agree wholeheartedly with the rest of your comment, but for this I'd just say, I photographed the comet 2 nights ago and it was fine. 180mm f/2.8, no tracking, a stack of 28x~3sec exposures brought out adequate detail. I would like to try with a tracking mount, but the northern sky is so bright here (partly due to the time of year, partly where I am due to light pollution), I'm not sure how much better it would be.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 20, 2020)

5DIV. FOUR. Remember that some Asians, because the number 4 is associated with death, are reluctant to name anything with a 4 in it or even to have a phone number with a four in it. It has been a few years now, but I vaguely remember a few posts wondering what number would follow the the 5DIII.

In any event, it appears the curse of the number four continues. Death for the full frame DSLR. (At least for the 5D series.)


----------



## Juangrande (Jul 20, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> The tests you refer to are comparing EF glass versus rough equivalent RF glass, and indeed - not surprisingly - the newer designs, with newer coatings, are superior. However, if you compare EF lenses on the 5D4 with EF lenses on the R, you'll find that the adapter makes absolutely no difference to image quality. So, the upshot is that your EF lenses will be just as good on the R. They won't magically be better, however.


I posted that that was the first time I had ever heard anyone say the EF lenses were any different adapted on mirrorless bodies. ( I should note that all mentions prior were using the EOS R or RP and not on the R5 so maybe that’s a factor) they responded “don’t believe it”. 
I hope their wrong because I can’t afford to replace all my glass right away and want to sell my mk4 when I upgrade. I may have to hold on to it. Perhaps they are hyper critical as well. 
We’ll see soon enough.


----------



## tron (Jul 20, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> 5DIV. FOUR. Remember that some Asians, because the number 4 is associated with death, are reluctant to name anything with a 4 in it or even to have a phone number with a four in it. It has been a few years now, but I vaguely remember a few posts wondering what number would follow the the 5DIII.
> 
> In any event, it appears the curse of the number four continues. Death for the full frame DSLR. (At least for the 5D series.)


It had (has) a very good life and the next wouldn't have 4 in it!


----------



## HenryL (Jul 20, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I just remember the 7D2 vanishing overnight.
> 
> It was there, then it was gone.
> 
> Maybe the 5D4 will be a different story, but with the big push to mirrorless I wouldn't be surprised to see the same thing happen to the 5D4.


7D2 hasn't vanished, you can still buy it new today, so there's hope you can still get a new 5DIV for a couple more years at least.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 20, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> 5DIV. FOUR. Remember that some Asians, because the number 4 is associated with death, are reluctant to name anything with a 4 in it or even to have a phone number with a four in it. It has been a few years now, but I vaguely remember a few posts wondering what number would follow the the 5DIII.
> 
> In any event, it appears the curse of the number four continues. Death for the full frame DSLR. (At least for the 5D series.)


This is why there are two readings for the number four, _shi_ and _yon_. Whenever possible, people try to avoid using the deathy one (shi). The Japanese also have two readings for nine as one sounds like the word for agony and torture.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jul 20, 2020)

The second parts was interesting. Canon wants to appease DSLR users. That can only work if they eiter develope new DLSRs or make existing DLSRs very chaeper. Imagine a 1D Mark III for the price of an R5. I would feel very appeased.


----------



## slclick (Jul 20, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> Even if Canon has not come out and announced that the R5 is the next generation of the 5 series, what is the R5 missing that would be in an 5d V other than EF mount, battery life and undefined EVF latency? You also have to ask what WOULDN'T be in the 5d V as you look at the 1d III being pushed by the R5/R6 (feature and AF, not build and other 1DX unique features) . As to pricing issues, the 5dIV launched in 2016 @ $3,499 which is $3,758 in 2020 dollars. This is the currency difference and may not reflect the additional development, manufacturing and logistics factored into the additional $241 sales price. Canon has at least given us a way to bridge from the EF to R platform which doesn't always happen in other industries.


Those three things are enough for many to stay with a mirror and the EF line. They're enough for me.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2020)

dak3 said:


> I'm sorry that you did not enjoy investing in photography equipment to photograph stupid birds. Since our planet is literally dying, it could be argued that one day, in a not so distant future, people will be craving to experience the beauty, simplicity, calmness, and environment of birds in an attempt to desperately capture that fragile world with photography / videography once again. By then, it will be too late. Given that 200,000 Americans graduate with an MBA every year, with no guarantee of making money or being happy, one could argue that the illusion imposed by society to the individual seeking their dream to be 'successful and happy' via another expensive degree is a deceitful ploy. Happiness is all in the eye of the beholder, and for so many photographers around the world, the personal 'value' of photographing the beauty of wildlife cannot be measured equally with societal value. In the end, to each their own.


1) I think you might have missed the [SARCASM] tag.
2) As your chart clearly shows, Canada Geese are taking over the world.


----------



## hoodlum (Jul 20, 2020)

According to this rumor from this morning the 90D won't be replaced either. This is likely related to the rumored high-end crop mirrorless body.





__





Canon EF system will be slowly phased out in 3 years time - Personal View Talks






personal-view.com







> We got a rumor suggesting the Canon EOS 90D and EOS 7D Mark II will not get a replacement. It seems we might see no Canon EOS 5D Mark V either.


----------



## Pixel (Jul 20, 2020)

There’s never been a “Mk V” in any line. Mark IV and done, move on to a different model.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 20, 2020)

hoodlum said:


> According to this rumor from this morning the 90D won't be replaced either. This is likely related to the rumored high-end crop mirrorless body.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Never heard of this site. What's the track record?


----------



## scyrene (Jul 20, 2020)

Pixel said:


> There’s never been a “Mk V” in any line. Mark IV and done, move on to a different model.



What you're saying is - 5DX!!!


----------



## hoodlum (Jul 20, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Never heard of this site. What's the track record?



Last November they predicted Olympus closure in 8 months.





__





Olympus controlled demolition, follow topic to get realtime updates - Personal View Talks






personal-view.com


----------



## dolina (Jul 20, 2020)

dak3 said:


> I'm sorry that you did not enjoy investing in photography equipment to photograph stupid birds. Since our planet is literally dying, it could be argued that one day, in a not so distant future, people will be craving to experience the beauty, simplicity, calmness, and environment of birds in an attempt to desperately capture that fragile world with photography / videography once again. By then, it will be too late. Given that 200,000 Americans graduate with an MBA every year, with no guarantee of making money or being happy, one could argue that the illusion imposed by society to the individual seeking their dream to be 'successful and happy' via another expensive degree is a deceitful ploy. Happiness is all in the eye of the beholder, and for so many photographers around the world, the personal 'value' of photographing the beauty of wildlife cannot be measured equally with societal value. In the end, to each their own.


My issue actually are largely with Philippine-based bird watchers who do not know how to mind their own business and want to fund raise off the work of people like me.

They meddle with the very legal activities of Philippine bird photographers who never had any intention to join them in spite of dozens of invitations to pay their fees and follow their rules. I only recognize Philippine law when I'm inside the Philippines and not silly birding rules imported from abroad.

When I go to places like Singapore, the US or Japan to go birding I comply with each respective country's national & local laws. Like in when I went to Smith Oaks Sanctuary in Texas. They had signs up saying that certain sheds and spaces may be reserved by other people and those who have not reserved cannot enter. Unusual rule but I respected and followed it.

They used my images in an unauthorized manner for their financial gain. Where are they when it comes to cock fighting? It harms more birds in 1 hour than any and all bird photographer could do in half a century.

I don't know about you but if you are used and abused by such persons would you be inclined to spend tens of thousands of $ on photographing birds? Their overreach impacted in my personal life. If I could get a DeLorean and travel back to when I was 27 I'd knock all my wisdom teeth out to put some sense into me not to go into birding.

My mother's dying wish is that I take up my MBA. My dad's wish is I take it up 2 years after graduating. Instead I went to one shithole to another to photographing birds when I should have graduated and make my own billion ₱ enterprise. Now with COVID-19... I'll have to delay it yet again.

There are millions of photographers who take photos of wildlife. Would my work be missed?

By the time everyone on this forum is dead new species of wildlife would evolve and taken the birds species' place. This has been happening for billions of years since the time of single cell organisms, first dinosaurs, saber-tooth tigers, homo erectus and homo superior. Anyone miss those fossils?

I get why you've replied that way based on the limited information I provided but birding cost me too much personally and it's an activity more suited for people 3x my age. My time was wasted and that's worth more than the tens of thousands of $ I spent on photographing stupid birds. The only females I met there were grandmas whose husbands wanted to face the birds than them.

If you did not encounter my problems then lucky you. The thing is I did.


----------



## Otara (Jul 20, 2020)

I imagine the 90D was the litmus test to some extent, and the reports of people using loupes on the 1DX3 screen over the OVF cant have helped either. 

" The Canon EOS 90D is a capable DSLR that happens to be at its best when used in live view mode."

I know DPreview isnt the best reference here, but that line in the review conclusion is probably why its not happening.


----------



## PhotoGenerous (Jul 20, 2020)

hoodlum said:


> According to this rumor from this morning the 90D won't be replaced either. This is likely related to the rumored high-end crop mirrorless body.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I always wondered how they would name the camera after the 90D. A 100D already exists. It's the SL1. I guess the answer is that they don't, because there never will be one released after it.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 20, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I went shooting the other day with the EOS R and the 5DSR. Using the 5DSR again after adapting to mirrorless was like going back to the stone age. I know there are plenty of people who love DSLRs, but no-way I'd ever go back to using one as my primary camera again.


Ive the EOS R and the 


jolyonralph said:


> I went shooting the other day with the EOS R and the 5DSR. Using the 5DSR again after adapting to mirrorless was like going back to the stone age. I know there are plenty of people who love DSLRs, but no-way I'd ever go back to using one as my primary camera again.


Ive the EOS R and a 5DS. I like using the EOS R as a walk-around / landscape camera but it frustrates the hell out of me using it for portraits. The 5DS is so much better as a portrait camera than the EOS R and not just because it 50mp as opposed to 30mp. 
I will be considering the purchase of the R5 but Im not getting rid of the 5DS just yet.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Jul 20, 2020)

Otara said:


> I imagine the 90D was the litmus test to some extent, and the reports of people using loupes on the 1DX3 screen over the OVF cant have helped either.
> 
> " The Canon EOS 90D is a capable DSLR that happens to be at its best when used in live view mode."
> 
> I know DPreview isnt the best reference here, but that line in the review conclusion is probably why its not happening.



Jared Polin (FroKnowsPhoto) came to pretty much the same conclusion when he reviewed the 1DX Mark III. As much as some don't want to hear it, mirrorless technology has completely surpassed the DSLR.


----------



## definedphotography (Jul 20, 2020)

AEWest said:


> Slightly off topic but Jared Polin has just released some raw files from a production r5 on his site. Might be worth a look.



Along with a youtube video with the R5 & R6 and the 800mm f11. The animal eye detection looks pretty impressive.


----------



## dolina (Jul 20, 2020)

definedphotography said:


> Along with a youtube video with the R5 & R6 and the 800mm f11. The animal eye detection looks pretty impressive.


R5 + 800/11 would be a dream setup for someone who shoots with a 5Ds R+ 800/5.6. The reach but at f/11 and yet less less weight and less price.

At $900 the 800/11 would be very easy to liquidate with only losing at most $200. That's lens rental money.


----------



## cornieleous (Jul 21, 2020)

Well, first, Canon source apparently said no Mk V, not no DSLR, so responding as if there will be no option doesn't make total sense. Maybe a new DSLR line to combine several others as they shrink down that market offering. I could see a combo of the 5D line with its best features and the 1DX3 best features put into a new monster priced about the same as the R5 but with a higher resolution sensor. 

For the future though, eventually the DSLR market will diminish way down to maybe one or two models at best. While I love my 5D4, I want to move in the direction of mirrorless for all the advantages, plus gradually shift to the new mount for all its advantages. So I am not sure resisting progress in this situation makes sense.

By the time we are another year or so down the road, power on these chips will drop again while doing the same job, and we may see 240fps EVF with even higher resolutions than 5.76M dots, and near zero lag (4ms or less should be imperceptible to human reaction time). Eventually the difference is going to be so slight from an OVF as to not matter for most applications. I'm sure glare and saturation will be improved as well too over time, though full optical will never look like EVF interpretation. For that reason, I must confess I don't like EVF for everything and wish there could be some kind of hybrid viewfinder that was optical when needed or wanted. I'm sure most of us can adapt to EVF as they improve.

Otherwise, the loss of the mirror system is a gain in pretty much every other way except maybe battery life, which I don't think will be that big a deal in most scenarios. I already have dummy batteries and 12V->8V converter cables with several sizes of 12V portable battery banks for time-lapse or other situations I want to shoot for a long while. It has been a way better option than grips and more batteries. Less weight, more power. With USB C power and charge option, I think a Li-ion grip with very extended life is now possible too, should Canon want to pursue.


----------



## tataylino (Jul 21, 2020)

If only they put the R5 internals(except EVF) into a 5D body, it may have lesser overheat problems. 
It will be a good option to those folks that still prefer a DSLR body.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 21, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> Well, first, Canon source apparently said no Mk V, not no DSLR, so responding as if there will be no option doesn't make total sense. Maybe a new DSLR line to combine several others as they shrink down that market offering. I could see a combo of the 5D line with its best features and the 1DX3 best features put into a new monster priced about the same as the R5 but with a higher resolution sensor.
> 
> For the future though, eventually the DSLR market will diminish way down to maybe one or two models at best. While I love my 5D4, I want to move in the direction of mirrorless for all the advantages, plus gradually shift to the new mount for all its advantages. So I am not sure resisting progress in this situation makes sense.
> 
> ...


At this point does it even make sense for Canon to come out with any new DSLR? The heart of any ILC camera system is the lens selection, and if Canon isn't making any more new EF lens updates, why buy into obsolecense? The only reasons I can think of are price and aversion to EVF.
I doubt Canon would want to go the value route (RP already $900) so why would Canon do this?


----------



## RBSfphoto (Jul 21, 2020)

infared said:


> How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?


I think we still have to see how it performs on an r5 but on my eos it performs as well if not faster to focus than on my 5ds or my mark iv. Have had zero issues using all my ef glass on the R. I have been doing this for a living for over 30 years, I tend to be more of a studio shooter , but in my personal work shoot travel, street photography and live music. what I have hated about the r is the lack of a joystick and a scroll wheel everything else I like better than my dslr's . I have not found the evf to be an issue at all even shooting live concerts, at this point, when i grab a camera it is mirrorless, I have a fuji system, a leica q, and the eos r, all the other dslrs sit on the shelf. I am happy to see the r and d go to improving the mirrorless experience for those that want to keep shooting dslr's we won't run of any on the used market anytime soon. No shortage of film cameras for sale used either. If nothing else pentax is committed to dslrs so you could switch systems.


----------



## Pixel (Jul 21, 2020)

scyrene said:


> What you're saying is - 5DX!!!


I’m good with that!!


----------



## dolina (Jul 21, 2020)

AEWest said:


> At this point does it even make sense for Canon to come out with any new DSLR? The heart of any ILC camera system is the lens selection, and if Canon isn't making any more new EF lens updates, why buy into obsolecense? The only reasons I can think of are price and aversion to EVF.
> I doubt Canon would want to go the value route (RP already $900) so why would Canon do this?



Whole camera market is shrinking even before this pandemic. With COVID-19 how many events or ad campaigns are being booked that can fund gear purchases?

I know out of work working photographers are liquidating their gear at a great loss to put food on the table. Businesses wont be back to pre-COVID levels until months after vaccines are made available.

Present EF system will be produced so long as there is demand but I expect production to halt by as late as 2025.

I wasnt surprised that the a new 1 Series and Rebel body was introduced this year. Would be very surprised if any other body comes out.


----------



## Pixel (Jul 21, 2020)

Juangrande said:


> According to a Canon Ambassador in their own YouTube comment thread (and further responding to my own follow up question) not as good as RF glass. They said not as sharp in their testing with lens calibration and naked eye. They had planned to keep their favorite EF lenses but decided after trying both mounts to replace with RF. Said the EF lenses were softer on the R5. I don’t know if that’s an issue of adapting the mount or if the R5 just out resolves the EF glass. I should’ve asked if it was the same with the R6. They also said the EF glass was perfectly sharp on their 5Dmk4 bodies, just soft on the R5.


There’s absolutely no reason for a loss in sharpness as there’s no glass in the adaptor. The only difference would be head to head performance of the lenses themselves.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 21, 2020)

Pixel said:


> There’s absolutely no reason for a loss in sharpness as there’s no glass in the adaptor. The only difference would be head to head performance of the lenses themselves.



Well...adapter measurements could be off. But I doubt that would be an issue with a Canon made adapter.


----------



## Cat_Interceptor (Jul 21, 2020)

Not surprised in the slightest. I only grab the 7D II when the weather isnt the best, the M6 II otherwise is just simply a more useful camera. DSLR is dead and Canon can see it in the sales figures


----------



## Pixel (Jul 21, 2020)

Pixel said:


> There’s absolutely no reason for a loss in sharpness as there’s no glass in the adaptor. The only difference would be head to head performance of the lenses themselves.


....AND the bigger sensor of the R5 is definitely going to magnify the flaws of older and lower resolution EF lenses.


----------



## slclick (Jul 21, 2020)

dolina said:


> My issue actually are largely with Philippine-based bird watchers who do not know how to mind their own business and want to fund raise off the work of people like me.
> 
> They meddle with the very legal activities of Philippine bird photographers who never had any intention to join them in spite of dozens of invitations to pay their fees and follow their rules. I only recognize Philippine law when I'm inside the Philippines and not silly birding rules imported from abroad.
> 
> ...


Oh the Philippines....now we have context. Usually the problem around here is many forumites assuming it's a Merkan site. We all have our problems, be them locally or globally. However the real problem is there possibly not being another 5D body. I say possibly since this is only a CR2 and not a reason to spill your San Miguel over your Asus laptop.


----------



## Pixel (Jul 21, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> Well...adapter measurements could be off. But I doubt that would be an issue with a Canon made adapter.


Measurements wouldn’t matter, the focusing is on the sensor and not a focus screen like DSLR. Right?


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 21, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Umm, didn't Canon's last film camera have an *eighteen *year production run?
> 
> If there will be no 5D5, the 5D4 production lifecycle just got _extended_, one would think.
> 
> - A


The problem with such a long production run is the availability of the electronic components. Mechanical parts can be created forever but silicon has a life cycle. This can be the fab or the technology used on the silicon or technology in general that is superceded. Items like CPU/GPU etc have a very limited life cycle. Try to have a corporate standard for laptops means re-qualifying every 3-6 months as the manufacturers exit various corporate models and generally only have a 12-18 month guarantee. Consumer life cycle is even shorter.
I worked in telecom manufacturing where telco providers used to insist of 10+ years of service/support!! Using Intel processors, memory etc was a pain as continuous R&D was needed to qualify the new parts (even specific corporate items) - not to mention when there was diversity of suppliers to ensure continuity.


----------



## dolina (Jul 21, 2020)

slclick said:


> Oh the Philippines....now we have context. Usually the problem around here is many forumites assuming it's a Merkan site. We all have our problems, be them locally or globally. However the real problem is there possibly not being another 5D body. I say possibly since this is only a CR2 and not a reason to spill your San Miguel over your Asus laptop.


It's fine by me if people assume I'm from Florida so people wont pussy foot around me.

When the new system came out I automatically knew all future development would grind to a halt for EF.

The rumor just gives some fuel to my assertion.

Over a decade wasted photographing stupid birds for bird watchers with no sense of boundaries.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 21, 2020)

Pixel said:


> Measurements wouldn’t matter, the focusing is on the sensor and not a focus screen like DSLR. Right?



If the adapter was too far out then the lens wouldn't be able to achieve focus on one end or the other. Also the adapter could introduce an angle that means one side or the other is OOF.

Again, I wouldn't expect this with Canon. I haven't even seen it with cheap 3rd party adapters off eBay (old glass to EOS M), but it is a potential source of error.


----------



## deleteme (Jul 21, 2020)

Canon put enormous resources behind the launch of the R5 and 6. Thinking they would also plow money into a DSLR in a declining market is highly unrealistic.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> Quarkcharmed, that might work for your concerts, but the problem with EVF lag is more about
> 1) the cumulative delay
> 2) after a series of burst shots
> 3) on a moving target



Those are valid concerns, that's true. I'm looking forward to seeing how the R5 handles that with its 120fps EVF. Note however that OVFs in DSLRs also produce full blackout due to the flapping mirror.



[email protected] said:


> Your figure of 8.3 ms isn't the lag, but rather is the time between refreshes of the monitor in the EVF. There is another delay, which is the processing time it takes to get the image from the sensor to the EVF. We don't know what that figure is yet on the R5. If it is less than 8.3 ms, then you will not have a cumulatively larger lag in the EVF, and all is good. Traditionally, though, that has not been the case. Even with the A9II, there is enough lag so that if you have a 20fps burst for a few seconds, the last shots will be significantly behind a fast moving subject.



During the burst - yes it may cause hiccups. But on the 8.3 ms delay we've already had a very interesting and heated (and very technical) debate here a few months ago.
My point is, briefly, if you have a 120fps EVF, your _processing time can't be more than 1/120s on average_. If it takes longer, the system won't be able to feed the EVF at 120 fps. Worst case IIRC is the lag in the range [1/120 ... 1/60] seconds, in case there's some parallelisation/multithreading. That's because the system can be taking exposure for the next frame while displaying the previous frame.
On the other hand, if the system is fast enough, you may be getting even less than 1/120s lag, if exposure+readout+display pipeline does everything faster than 1/120s.



[email protected] said:


> Because the A9II is a beast when it comes to read-out (stacked sensor and a few other innovative things), I'm not optimistic the R5 will be better than the Sony in this one feature. Hope to be wrong. I have been on other elements where I've underestimated this body. -tig



I think the A9II does the same 120fps and the reviews are pretty positive on it in general, but burst shooting cases hiccups they say. But not in the electronic shutter mode, which is an advantage over OVFs where you experience a full blackout because of the swinging mirror.


----------



## idave4321 (Jul 21, 2020)

The EF glass works amazingly well on the R line, and the RF mount offers benefits that couldn’t be matched on EF - personally I hope canon keeps focusing on their RF future, and brings out some of those rumoured lenses like the 14-28 f2 and 70-135 f2! New DSLRs pull resources from R&D, compete with their new mirrorless lineup, their current DSLRs, and also a ton of high quality DSLR gear that professionals will be selling as well... this seems like a good business decision, and ultimately they WILL be offering better gear we can all be excited about! I tested the RF 85 1.2 DS on the R, in the city at night, and was Really impressed with the AF, it was well beyond what I could achieve with the 1.2 EF on the 5D4, and on the R5 and R6 that performance will be even better! It’s not really worth paying a lot of money for the same tech that is in an R5 to be crammed into a DSLR, and give you worse performance than you would get in the R5 anyway - the 1DXiii didn’t do so well, but I believe a main factor is that people are waiting for an R1 instead, and getting ready for the leap to mirrorless. It’s exciting to see Canon pushing the limits... The main concern I have is that DSLRs do get substantially more photos per battery, but that is a problem that can be worked around


----------



## victorshikhman (Jul 21, 2020)

The 5D4 is still selling well, and many would have been happy to pick up the successor, which would mostly have reused existing components. Let's be honest what this is really about. Canon is pushing FF mirrorless. The R5 needs to be a success. If you were the executive in charge of the company, and you clearly are pushing the transition to mirrorless, would you allow a competing product to divert sales from the one metric that you need to show in the powerpoint to the board of directors (R5/R6 sales, and the RF lens sales they drive)? Of course, the answer is no.


----------



## Otara (Jul 21, 2020)

Pixel said:


> There’s absolutely no reason for a loss in sharpness as there’s no glass in the adaptor. The only difference would be head to head performance of the lenses themselves.



Without examples and a possible explanation its not worth worrying about. 











Absent a brick wall test showing stuff I dont generally lose sleep over, this looks fine to me with an adapted 100-400mm.


----------



## Maru (Jul 21, 2020)

I believe.. putting a 5dmkV risks the sell of R5 so they cant do a 5d5 ...thats the only reason.. R5 is already costly and doesnt attract a 7dmkII or 90d owner {From price points}..they can only push 5d people for R5 or R6 by discarding 5d series


----------



## dolina (Jul 21, 2020)

I think a reason why Canon came out with the 1Dx Mark III is for latency issues that may impact sports/photojournalists. They tend to want to keep to tried and true tech.

As for a new Rebel it's targeted at the low end user who tends to be tech laggards and price sensitive.

I hope Canon would disclose when their last EF bodies and EF to RF adapters would be manufactured so I'll get the last units of the last production run.


----------



## slclick (Jul 21, 2020)

dolina said:


> It's fine by me if people assume I'm from Florida so people wont pussy foot around me.
> 
> When the new system came out I automatically knew all future development would grind to a halt for EF.
> 
> ...


Florida, currently making Kentucky and Utah look good.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> Well, first, Canon source apparently said no Mk V, not no DSLR, so responding as if there will be no option doesn't make total sense. Maybe a new DSLR line to combine several others as they shrink down that market offering. I could see a combo of the 5D line with its best features and the 1DX3 best features put into a new monster priced about the same as the R5 but with a higher resolution sensor.



As I said earlier, I think an amalgamation of the 5D and 6D is more likely. Canon already did that with the 80D and 7D, so it makes sense that they would be considering the same with their full frame DSLRs. Good news, it should be cheaper than the 5D. Bad news is there will be compromises. Repeating myself I know, but I don't think it's hard to imagine a new body that has:


Same sensor as R5;
Dual SD II slots (No CFexpress)
Flip Screen like 6D
Joystick like R5 and 5D
No IBIS
10 fps
Build somewhere between 6D and 5D
Autofocus carried over from 5DIV (Maybe some improvement like eye, face or animal face detect)
A bonus would be the 1DxIII thumb controller
I would expect that it would be a little more 5D than 6D, just as the 90D is really more 7D than 80D.
No 8K or other high-end video features (the R5 will remain the video king)

Given the aggressive pricing that Canon offered on the 90D, they might sell it for under $2,500.

With aggressive pricing, I could see a lot of enthusiasts and pros who don't need the build of the 1Dx happy with the compromises. 

Canon's line up for the next few years might be:


Two full frame DSLRs -- 1Dx III and the new amalgamation;
Six full frame mirrorless -- RP, R, RA, R6, R5 and R5S (High Megapixel) Sorry, but if there is no room in the market for separate 5D and a 6D bodies, there probably isn't room for both an R5 and an R1 now. It might be a possibility around the time of the 2024 Summer Olympics, but honestly, if the R5 delivers, I'm not sure what an R1 gets you except a bigger battery. I expect that eventually they will drop the R and or the RP, but at this point they can just leave them in the lineup;
A range of M bodies, with the M7 sitting at the top of the line as the replacement for the 7D (Canon wants to get out of the business of mixing full frame and APS-C lineups and an M version of the 7D makes the most sense);
90D with future models being badged as 90D Mk II, etc.

This sort of a lineup would see Canon through for the next several years as they watch the market and determine whether or not there will be a smaller but stable demand for DSLRs or if the demand is going to go away.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2020)

Otara said:


> Without examples and a possible explanation its not worth worrying about.



I'm a little concerned that I saw only one Bird in Flight sequence and they didn't show any closeups of the results. Eye focus of a stationary bird is one thing. Eye focus of the flying bird is another. Anxious to see this camera in the wild with people who actually shoot birds in flight to see what it does.


----------



## photo212 (Jul 21, 2020)

My 5D Mk III is not going anywhere, anytime soon. I still have two 5D Mk II as backups - one with 300K shutter activations. 

I didn't jump to the 5D Mk IV, as it just wasn't the big step I wanted. I started getting interested in the 1D X Mk II. Real interested. Then the 1D X Mk III arrived, but with only one option for memory cards. Sort of made me think the 1D X Mk II was the camera upgrade for me. I suspect Canon wants more 5D Mk X users to consider the 1D X line. 

I gotta think total budget, as I'll need a new desktop computer in the upgrade.


----------



## brad-man (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I'm a little concerned that I saw only one Bird in Flight sequence and they didn't show any closeups of the results. Eye focus of a stationary bird is one thing. Eye focus of the flying bird is another. Anxious to see this camera in the wild with people who actually shoot birds in flight to see what it does.


I'm guessing that the success rate for BIF eye focus would be proportional to how much the bird fills the frame. Those that rely on heavy cropping may be SOL...


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 21, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> Like Alan I don't have any issues with action photography, including BiF, with a 5Ds. I've shot it with the Canon 300mm f/4L IS, 100-400 mark II, and Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 G2. If your 5DsR is struggling here check settings and also consider if it's the lens.
> 
> Naturally the 1DX mark III's PDAF is superior, and Nikon's PDAF "sticks" better than Canon's iTR. (Which is a bummer because I honestly believe a firmware fix would change that.) But the PDAF system in the 5Ds is quite good.
> 
> ...



I have been doing MW shots with the 5DSR for years so know its limits. It does pretty well overall for astro. I also shot NEOWISE last night near our place that has extremely dark skies and again it did fine. A tracked shot would have been much better but I was happy with the result.


----------



## bernie_king (Jul 21, 2020)

brad-man said:


> I'm guessing that the success rate for BIF eye focus would be proportional to how much the bird fills the frame. Those that rely on heavy cropping may be SOL...


I agree... at least for eye detect. If drops back to the body if it can't find the eye. For longer distance BIF shots I think that would be great if would lock in the bird and not let go.


----------



## GastonShutters (Jul 21, 2020)

Makes sense. And probably time to sell my left over EF Glass...


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> As I said earlier, I think an amalgamation of the 5D and 6D is more likely. Canon already did that with the 80D and 7D, so it makes sense that they would be considering the same with their full frame DSLRs. Good news, it should be cheaper than the 5D. Bad news is there will be compromises. Repeating myself I know, but I don't think it's hard to imagine a new body that has:
> 
> 
> Same sensor as R5;
> ...


There will be an R1 due to the demand for a 1dx style body for all the reasons you have the 1dx today - rugged, extensive weather sealing, longer battery life, communications, better 8k implementation, etc. Depending on where the R1 is in the development cycle, you may see this in pros hands by the 2021 Olympics (assuming it happens). Canon will jam it with any new tech that improves the use & experience for pros. Canon has always chased that top tier of photographers even if it may not always be the highest volume or maybe even the most profitable when you factor in development costs. The good news is that technology trickles down. I also think the R or RP get consolidated. Excessive product differentiation doesn't make sense in a declining market - too much cost to maintain multiple product lines and SKU's.


----------



## Eclipsed (Jul 21, 2020)

When will Canon be shutting down all the firmware on the 5Div bodies to render them unusable? Or will those who like them be able to continue to use them at lower and lower cost?


----------



## Otara (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I'm a little concerned that I saw only one Bird in Flight sequence and they didn't show any closeups of the results. Eye focus of a stationary bird is one thing. Eye focus of the flying bird is another. Anxious to see this camera in the wild with people who actually shoot birds in flight to see what it does.



Not talking about tracking, just pure image quality from an EF lens on the R5. There are several videos with raptor tracking that look fairly impressive, but they're probably with RF lenses.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> There will be an R1 due to the demand for a 1dx style body for all the reasons you have the 1dx today...



If there is an R1, and if it is intended to replace the 1DX, then it should be on a four-year cycle and hence the 2024 Olympics. Maybe they will launch it early and have it ready for the 2022 Winter Olympics, but 2021 seems hopelessly optimistic at this point.


----------



## navastronia (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> If there is an R1, and if it is intended to replace the 1DX, then it should be on a four-year cycle and hence the 2024 Olympics. Maybe they will launch it early and have it ready for the 2022 Winter Olympics, but 2021 seems hopelessly optimistic at this point.



As I've said before, that would be totally fine with me (2022). I think 2024 would be too long to wait.

I'd like an R1 to have extremely fast sensor readout or global shutter to help justify the price, which I anticipate will be greater than $6K.


----------



## Terry Danks (Jul 21, 2020)

Change is always hard. And a lot harder for some than others.
I'm so old, I recall how some refused to accept those infernal mirror-slapping SLRs, insisting they'd never edge out their lighter and so much quieter rangefinders! 
I've taken to MLC like a duck to water! So many advantages. Find it hard to fathom the people preferring DSLRs. One by one, the "deficiencies" of MLC are falling to the wayside. 
I see no future for DSLRs at all, but, of course, so many are out there, it will take a decade or so to seriously deplete their number even after the last one is manufactured.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I'm a little concerned that I saw only one Bird in Flight sequence and they didn't show any closeups of the results. Eye focus of a stationary bird is one thing. Eye focus of the flying bird is another. Anxious to see this camera in the wild with people who actually shoot birds in flight to see what it does.


----------



## shire_guy (Jul 21, 2020)

I am not too worried about no 5DV. My existing 5DIV is a great camera and it still should have plenty of life in it. The R5 is someway off for me given prices in Australia. My collection of EF glass is enough for my current usage and I had been unsure if I should invest in a longer telephoto lens. That is now less likely. At least the kids will be happy that their inheritance is safe for now.


----------



## Respinder (Jul 21, 2020)

I’m not surprised by this decision and I think it’s firmly a step in the right direction.
At the time the EOS R was released Canon was pushing four different mount types - EF, EF-S, EF-M and RF. This made things very confusing for the consumer and for me personally, it introduced a lot of uncertainly into whether Canon was serious about making RF the future mount.

What a difference that two years have made. In that time, Canon formerly announced that no future EF glass will be made (unless consumers demand it) and now the Canon 5D is retired in favour of the Canon R5. I think this is a smart and strategic move, and it places further confidence in the positioning of the RF mount as the future for Canon.

I think for those who demand the features of a traditional DSLR - in particular those who require an OVF, the Canon 1DX Mark III will always be there. I could also see Canon still release a 5DS Mark II at some point in the future. (Also for those who believe that the 5DS equivalent in the R lineup is the R5S, I think you’re wrong - I think Canon finally has a reason to bring back the mythical 3-series (R3) as a ultra high megapixel shooter slotted in between the R1 and R5 - just my two cents)

I also think Canon may still launch the long rumoured EF-X hybrid with support for RF and EF lenses.. may cost a fortune though.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> If there is an R1, and if it is intended to replace the 1DX, then it should be on a four-year cycle and hence the 2024 Olympics. Maybe they will launch it early and have it ready for the 2022 Winter Olympics, but 2021 seems hopelessly optimistic at this point.



Maybe, but you can't consider this a cycle for the 1dx III which I agree would match your dates. Canon will not release a R1 until it is ready, but when you see that a lot of the 1dx III landed in the R5/R6, the only real issues they need to solve are the battery life and EVF for pro shooters in a 1dx style body. The 8k performance should be on par since they already have the larger body to dissipate heat. I don't think the R1 will be a great leap above the 1dx III, just move of the move to mirrorless for those who want to start a migration. Cannon does not want Sony to continue to nibble at a market they have only shared with the Nikon d5/D6. They would also want to beat Nikon to the punch before a D6 mirrorless equivalent is released. They probably were not ready for the 2020 Olympics and were targeting the 2022 games, with the extra year they may be able to push for a development announcement and R1's in the hands of select pros. If not, your 2022 dates seems more reasonable than the 2024 Olympics.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jul 21, 2020)

As expected, what on earth do you expect it could offer over the R5 other than better battery life. Mirrorless AF is also showing itself to be better with 1DXIII LV AF noticeably better than it's OVF AF. Now just announce the RF 300 f/2.8L IS 500 f/4L IS, 600 f/5.6L IS DO


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 21, 2020)

Respinder said:


> I also think Canon may still launch the long rumoured EF-X hybrid with support for RF and EF lenses.. may cost a fortune though.


I don't think this stands a chance of happening at all. The closest thing we are going to see in a "hybrid" is an RF mount mirrorless camera with the adapter for EF lenses. That's it. That's as hybrid as it is going to get, in my opinion. As far as there being a long rumored EF-X hybrid... that's just forum chatter with zero leaks from Canon connected sources. Kinda like the guys who talk about a body with a movable sensor to change flange distance, and a mirror that can drop down when needed. Never going to happen.


----------



## mclaren777 (Jul 21, 2020)

Have fun taking pictures of anything that moves quickly/erratically with your mirrorless cameras (GIF is from an R5).

I'll be over here patiently waiting for a 5DV.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 21, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> Have fun taking pictures of anything that moves quickly/erratically with your mirrorless cameras (GIF is from an R5).
> 
> I'll be over here patiently waiting for a 5DV.
> 
> View attachment 191456


I think you are going to have a really long wait.

This video may be a little more informative than yours. Just skip over the YouTube add after the first few seconds.






Definitely a marketing spin, but he seems to be pretty excited based on actually shooting the camera. There is also a video form Beck in Africa shooting wildlife. Hopefully, I will have the camera at the end of next week and be able to judge for myself if the heat in Atlanta allows me to photograph my friends agility/disc dogs. Lots of speed and erratic motion with obstacles.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 21, 2020)

For a new 5DV to sell well, it would need to be released in late 2021 to allow all the R5 people to migrate if they were going to. It would need to include:
- all the R5 bits (excluding EVF)
- the AF system from the 1DXII
- extended video recording limits due to bigger/better heat dissipation
The price will be higher than the R5 to compensate for the extra R&D and less sales. LP-3NH battery will give even more battery life for the OVF shooting

The ergonomics is the question for me.... 
- A flippy screen will cost a lot to redesign the 5Div so it may not be included and may be perceived as less rugged. Would this stop new buyers?
- Adding the fancy AF-on button from the 1DXIII could offset a flippy screen option and should be a simpler swap though that would mean more firmware/circuitry to include/test.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 21, 2020)

For the control ring (either on RF lens or adaptor), what would you use it for as the R5 has 3 wheels now? Aperture, ISO, shutter speed and exposure compensation?


----------



## navastronia (Jul 21, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> For a new 5DV to sell well, it would need to be released in late 2021 to allow all the R5 people to migrate if they were going to. It would need to include:
> - all the R5 bits (excluding EVF)
> - the AF system from the 1DXII
> - extended video recording limits due to bigger/better heat dissipation
> The price will be higher than the R5 to compensate for the extra R&D and less sales. LP-3NH battery will give even more battery life for the OVF shooting



This is gonna sound cynical, because it is, but I don't think Canon need to do much more than slap "5D Mark V" on a body to sell many thousands of them.

As long as it has an OVF and good battery life, it will sell, innovation be damned.


----------



## degos (Jul 21, 2020)

rwvaughn said:


> The market made the decision.



We won't be able to infer that until two or three years from now.

Canon doesn't release sales figures for individual models. We don't know how R5 were pre-ordered, it could have been 10,000 or a million. We don't know how that compares to 5D4 pre-sales.

But we do know that the majority of Canon users have not ordered an R5.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 21, 2020)

degos said:


> We won't be able to infer that until two or three years from now.
> 
> Canon doesn't release sales figures for individual models. We don't know how R5 were pre-ordered, it could have been 10,000 or a million. We don't know how that compares to 5D4 pre-sales.
> 
> But we do know that the majority of Canon users have not ordered an R5.


To be fair, we also know the majority of Canon users have not ordered a 5D Mark IV or 1DX Mark III either. The majority of buyers are at the low end and not FF. Zero have ordered a 5D Mark V. It doesn't exist. Canon has (if the rumor is true) decided there will be no 5D Mark V. Is there a market for one? At this moment there obviously is... on this forum at least. Is it a big enough market for Canon to spend the money to build one? Canon says no, and gives it the ax. On the other hand, Canon might just decide to replace it with something else. However, it won't be labeled a 5D Mark V.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

lloyd709 said:


> Strategy fits in with the market that Canon is focusing on (excuse the pun) - people that don't use the kit to make a living but have deep pockets. Makes commercial sense I guess but it's not good for the most of the guys still eking out a living shooting. Budgets are tight and the last thing we can do with is an unnecessary complete kit switch for what is in reality very little gain (for me complete silent shooting would be handy sometimes) and loss in some departments (digital viewfinder, battery drain and I don't care for the slight reduction in size). I only know 2 professionals that use mirrorless and they were both 'sponsored' to do so!! I'm 50 and hoping for another 15 years shooting - wonder if I can get there with a 5DIV!!!!!



In the current economy, though, upgrading a 5D Mark IV with plenty of life still left in it to a new 5D Mark V doesn't make much sense, either, for many of those still struggling to make a living shooting.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> I had only ever had DSLR's and went straight from a 7D mkII to the EOSR. The smaller body and weight loss was great. The sacrifice was the slow FPS but overall an easy move. with the R5 rectifying the FPS issue I'm a happy man, when I get the R5 delivered that is.
> 
> I never got to own or use a 5DIV but everyone I know swears by them as solid workhorses. I can understand the sadness if there is no newer version but as they say, time stands still for no man / woman lol. Hopefully the R5 will be the replacement and workhorse everyone wants it to be but you can always use it as a hand warmer in winter if you like shooting 8k a lot, allegedly.



Though it may well be that the R5 is just as tough as the 5D Mark IV, many of us old-timers still associate "large and heavy" with "tough" and "compact and light" with "not quite as tough."


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

spandau said:


> Look at the sales figures for Interchangeable Lens 35mm sensor cameras. Down, down, down and we will be fortunate if Canon has an R series line in the next five years, let alone a 5d series.



Most of that loss is in the entry level APS-C part of the market, which has by far the biggest numbers to lose. FF DSLRs (or even x0D and 7-series bodies) never sold in near the same numbers as Rebels.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

mppix said:


> Obvious news for anyone that paid attention how much effort Canon put into RF ranging from lenses to bodies.
> 
> This one is going down like FD to EF



Not even close. 

EF lenses are easily adaptable to RF bodies with no loss of functionality.

FD lenses were non-compatible with EOS bodies, even with an adapter with optics that was essentially also a TC, in so many ways.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

preppyak said:


> But in a tighter market, selling fewer cameras, that incremental cost is probably the entire profit margin of the R5.
> 
> If you're Canon, what secures your future better. Producing two cameras that are functionally the same spec wise, but in different bodies, requiring two production and assembly lines or the efficiencies of scale of just one? Especially when that one product pushes people to purchase new lenses as well.



It matters not what that incremental cost is compared to the profit margin of the R5.

What Canon would consider is what that incremental cost would be in relation to the entire profit margin of the 5D Mark V.
They'd also look at how many sales of R5 bodies they would lose for the number of 5D Mark V bodies they would sell.

Why produce a camera you'll barely make any money on when most of the sales you won't make by not producing it will be replaced by sales of a product you already make?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

infared said:


> How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?



As well as or better than on a 5-series DSLR. There's no loss of lens functionality when using EF lenses on even the R and RP. With IBIS in the R5/R6, there is potential for enhanced functionality when using an EF lens on an R5/R6 compared to using the same lens on a 5D Mark IV.


----------



## JoTomOz (Jul 21, 2020)

This decision probably has a lot to do with maintaining the lens library(ies). Sure, you could make a dslr version of the R5 but that has your customers thinking... 

how are the lenses for this dslr camera? Are they going to buy 20-30 year old optical designs (new?) to go with these cameras? Or buy Third party(sigma art) or second hand instead? 

So if you need to keep producing EF lenses to go with the new dslrs, can you afford to maintain two huge lens lines? Are there enough dslr holdouts to recoup the r&d on those new EF lenses? And as a business they’ve just spent big bucks developing RF lenses for the FF mirrorless cameras.

in a camera market that is on the decline overall, I think they needed to choose. Sure, they may make another FF dslr, but they are probably looking at Sony’s growth and didn’t want to miss the boat.


----------



## hollybush (Jul 21, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Why would a person switch their entire system - not just body, lenses and flashes and everything else - just to avoid Canon mirrorless?



I'd do it to avoid the extra control wheel on the RF lenses. I've had such a thing on one of my film systems and I don't want to ever go there again.

This is really a special case of me not liking the RF lens system at all. It seems to be mainly pitched towards wedding photographers, which I am not, and so far there isn't a single lens in the system I like. The new f/11 long lenses with non-rotating tripod mounts were the last straw. It may well be Canon know their market, and their choices are based on a hard-nosed calculation that people like me have fairly complete systems and aren't potential customers anyway.

Meanwhile, the Sony A9 and some of their lenses beckon, including one in particular not available in either EF or RF mount.

I find the often-heard claims that Canon bodies are easier to hold or use very odd. I've always considered Canon to be hopeless at industrial design. I loathed my 5-series from the day I bought it until I eventually replaced it by a pair of 1-series, which I've come to tolerate. So I certainly won't be weeping if the 5-series is discontinued. Neither would I be predisposed to a Canon mirrorless over other brands. To make me use an adapter for my EF lenses on the R5 is therefore just inviting me to switch.

The industrial design of the EF lenses is OK, even if stylistically they look like they've time-travelled from 1992, but the addition of the control wheel indicates that the bad design is now leaking out from the bodies. See also that stupid hatch in the 100–400mm II hood.

(As for what I'd actually *buy*, it will boil down to realism. The R5 fills a couple of specific gaps in my system, and I can see myself buying it for that, even though I wouldn't use the camera as a main body. I'd buy the plain adaptor without the ring of unconfidence, of course. I could plug one of those gaps with the 1Dx Mk III, but it's too expensive for what it is and that leaves the other gap sitting there waiting for a camera from another brand. Or I might stay where I am.)


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 21, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> Have fun taking pictures of anything that moves quickly/erratically with your mirrorless cameras (GIF is from an R5).
> 
> I'll be over here patiently waiting for a 5DV.
> 
> View attachment 191456



interesting.... with IBIS on? Any other known parameters and conditions?


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

infared said:


> I think if a 5D5 was made with some sensor improvement AND a larger focus point spread, that a lot of people would buy it. ...



But the vast majority of those 5D Mark V sales would instead eventually be R5 sales if the 5D Mark V is not made. So Canon would have to sell enough 5D Mark V bodies over and above the number of R5 bodies they do not sell because the 5D Mark V body is available in order to recover the additional investment of bringing the 5D Mark V to market.

Put it in simple, round numbers I'm totally pulling out of my butt:

Let's say the fixed cost of bringing a 5D Mark V to market is 100,000,000 dollars.

Let's say the wholesale price for the 5D Mark V less the per unit manufacturing, warranty reserve cost, and delivery (to retail dealers) cost of the 5D Mark V is $500.

Canon would need to sell 200,000 more 5D Mark V bodies than the number of R5 sales they do not make due to offering the 5D Mark V_ just to break even on the 5D Mark V._

If Canon sells 800,000 5D Mark V bodies they make $300M in profit on the 5D Mark V. ($400M on a per unit basis less the $100M initial cost)

But if Canon loses 700,000 R5 sales because that many folks that would have otherwise bought an R5 instead of an 5D Mark V, then they have lost the profit they would have made on those 700,000 R5 sales. 

Let's assume the per unit cost of the R5 allows for $700 net profit on each unit.

The $300M profit from selling 800,000 5D Mark V bodies is more than offset by the $490M profit they did not make on the 700,000 R5 bodies they would otherwise have sold.

So investing $100M in producing a 5D Mark V results in $190M less in total profits for the company, even though they sold 100K more camera bodies.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> And you are providing more weight to your own opinion (which appears to be wishful thinking), with no direct knowledge or access to those who do, than those of this site. That's ridiculous.



And apparently your own self opinion depends on criticizing someone else about how wrong their opinion is when it disagrees with yours.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I'm not butt hurt or screaming into a pillow or anything. _My _next camera will be mirrorless, personally.
> 
> But I am not one of the army of working professionals at weddings toting a 5D today. I think saying goodbye to that brand that quickly would be a mistake, but I don't have Canon's internal numbers to say 'See, look how many there are!'.
> 
> - A



On the other hand, how many of those working professionals are at weddings toting a 5D _this summer_?

How many extra years will it be, due to the disruption in their business on account of the allout from the SARS-CoV-2 virus, before they could afford, from a business cost/benefit point of view, to upgrade from their current 5D Mark IV to a 5D Mark V?

Will many of them or even most of them even survive as a business at all? Will the way we have done high-end weddings in the past ever look like that again?


----------



## hollybush (Jul 21, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> But the vast majority of those 5D Mark V sales would instead eventually be R5 sales if the 5D Mark V is not made.



I think this assumption, which underlies many of the posts in this thread, is false. My post a couple above yours ran through the reasons it isn't true for me.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> But this presumes that:
> 
> 1) 5D users won't leave to another company that is still putting out modern SLRs.
> 
> ...



What company would that be? Nikon's DSLRs aren't all that "modern" unless you use "E" lenses - which for the most part are just as eye watering expensive as RF lenses - instead of "G" or earlier lenses with mechanical aperture linkages.
Pentax? Seriously?

Again, what other company is making DSLRs with 45MP x 20 fps?
What other company is making DSLRs with 8K video?


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 21, 2020)

jeffa4444 said:


> Ive the EOS R and a 5DS. I like using the EOS R as a walk-around / landscape camera but it frustrates the hell out of me using it for portraits. The 5DS is so much better as a portrait camera than the EOS R and not just because it 50mp as opposed to 30mp.
> I will be considering the purchase of the R5 but I'm not getting rid of the 5DS just yet.



You're absolutely right on this, and this is why I've still got the 5DSR for now.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Jul 21, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Though it may well be that the R5 is just as tough as the 5D Mark IV, many of us old-timers still associate "large and heavy" with "tough" and "compact and light" with "not quite as tough."


It's funny what you get used to over time. I loved my 7D mkII but after several days in New York carting it around, I developed arm and shoulder ache. When the R was launched it looked to be a great replacement and a step up to full frame. Little did I know about it's limitations with FPS and AF. it was smaller and lighter but it just felt solid and heavy enough to be robust. I've used it for a year and love it for landscapes but have adapted my style for moving objects and find I take it out more because it is smaller and lighter but have had no concerns about it being delicate.

I'm trading it in for an R5 as it looks like that will give me the FPS and it's also slightly chunkier & heavier but not a brick like the 7DMKII. It's not cheap but it's a win for me, plus the bonus of some amazing video options.  Time will tell I suppose. I now find myself with no camera body and a wait until the R5 comes. Hopefully that will be soon after 30/07/20.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jul 21, 2020)

The only real advantage of mirrorless cameras I see so far is the IBIS. I hope they will one day put an IBIS into a DSLR, even if that means that this stabilization is not visible through the OVF, but only on the final photo, which is somehow confusing and a departure from the principle that you can preview the exact framing through the viewfinder. 

My Canon DSLR came out in 2012 and even until today there is nothing besides IBIS I really miss at the camera on the still images side. And if you need a high resolution, there is nothing besides IBIS that really misses at the 5Ds R. Both could have better noise of course, but mirrorless cameras do not solve that problem.

And please do not make pro cameras smaller and lighter! Even customers complain, if you charge them a lot of money for photos taken by a small camera. Therefore some photographers even put a battery grip at their Sony A9, even if they do not need that extra battery capacity. A professional truck is much larger than a private car. The same should be true for cameras.


----------



## hollybush (Jul 21, 2020)

Skyscraperfan said:


> The only real advantage of mirrorless cameras I see so far is the IBIS.



For my purposes, AF right across the image is a big one. I am prepared to accept a degraded viewfinder experience compared to a DSLR given the DSLR can't do that - but not really for general use where I don't need that AF.

I see IBIS more as a disadvantage for my particular use case.

I'm probably not alone in considering a mirrorless + 1 lens for that use case, and to stay with my DSLR stuff for other uses. That's why Canon would be wrong to assume a "general purpose" R5 could replace a "general purpose" 5D.

After all, in the film era some people owned a 35mm SLR + long lens for one purpose and a rollfilm Hasselblad for another.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

hollybush said:


> For my purposes, AF right across the image is a big one. I am prepared to accept a degraded viewfinder experience compared to a DSLR given the DSLR can't do that - but not really for general use where I don't need that AF.
> 
> I see IBIS more as a disadvantage for my particular use case.
> 
> ...



On the other hand, in the film era the cost of bodies contributed far less towards the total cost per frame than in the digital era. You selected the lens you needed for a job, then got a body that matched that lens. The cost of film and developing dwarfed the cost of bodies over the life of the camera.


----------



## chik0240 (Jul 21, 2020)

Ok, that's a sad enough news for me. Personally I can understand the financial standpoint of that and I agree that the R5 and R6 looks to have such impressive spec.

But personally I likely will stick to my 5D III for much longer time before I would change to mirrorless, after all acquiring all those L glass is not a cheap and easy thing to do, it takes me around 10 years to buy all those I would like to have, and I am absolutely not changing all those to the RF for better IQ than the already very good EF L glass. and while the EOS R5 and R6 are guaranteed to work great with adapted EF lens, now the native mount tie to me is gone and I am open to other brand mirrorless as most have some kind of fully working EF lens adapter ready on the market. Likely I will wait for Sigma Foven MILC or try the panasonic or Leica colour when I feel the price performance is ready. now personally the game is open for me to see which system I will go next, the RF lenses to me is way to big for those crazy spec and far too expensive to make me jump directly into it


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> At 120Hz, EVF isn't far off a real-time OVF. And EVFs are actually better in the dark. OVFs are on a very thin ice at the moment.



It all depends upon the use case. EVF is better for some things, OVF is better for other things. Both have their advantages.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

Joules said:


> I don't know about that one. They are the guys who tried to tell the people they don't need 24p, and maintain a similar position about many other features. There is a reason Magic Lantern existed. There is nothing wrong with it and I agree that crippling is the wrong word. But as I see it, Canon absolutely has an image of what the majority of people value enough to pay for and is comfortably withholding things that they don't really need. Even though they want it.
> 
> I can see how Canon sees the 5D V as one of those things. People want it, but the majority may not need it enough to make it worth putting the effort into a fading system.



Canon didn't really try to tell anyone they didn't need 24P, they just didn't realize there were that many people in other world areas besides Japan that used it at the level it is used in the U.S. and Western Europe. As soon as they discovered how big a deal it was to many of their customers, they quickly added it to those models.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> *...to you*. Agree with most of your points, but to answer your question:
> 
> _"Why would a person switch their entire system - not just body, lenses and flashes and everything else - just to avoid Canon mirrorless?"_​
> The answer might be:
> ...



The true Luddites never went to the EOS system in the first place.

"An all electronic connection between lens and camera? Are you kidding me? How can I use it when my battery is dead?"


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jul 21, 2020)

A compromise for me would be using a DSLR for photos and an R5 for heating my house in winter.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Umm, didn't Canon's last film camera have an *eighteen *year production run?
> 
> If there will be no 5D5, the 5D4 production lifecycle just got _extended_, one would think.
> 
> - A



They had existing stocks for eighteen years after it was introduced. I don't think anyone outside of Canon actually knows when the last one was made.

It may well be that the last 5D Mark IV has already been made and stockpiled and existing stocks will last for a few years, or they may still be making them every month. Back when L lenses had decodable date codes, there are multi-year gaps in some of the less popular lenses between production runs.


----------



## schiueva (Jul 21, 2020)

Ramage said:


> You have a valid use case that I think many photographers of rare or hard to photograph animals can relate to. That said I do think an EVF with zero perceived lag is very possible and only a matter of time but the use case of using little or no power is a tough nut to crack.
> 
> One area I am hoping the early reviews will look at is powering the R5/R6 with PD powerbanks from companies like Anker. While I do not have same requirement to look through a OVF/EVF for hours I do want to be able to run some extreme time-lapses and my EOS R just never was able to because of battery life. The 2 Anker PD powerbanks I have charge the EOS R just fine but will not power the R. I hope this has been changed for the R5/R6.



EVF are great but using it couple hours straight On events and wedding, hurt my eyes. It never happen to me with ovf. Lol


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> The battery life is an issue but it's solved through having multiple batteries. Not ideal but works.
> 
> EVF lag at 120fps is 0.0083s. It's 10-20 times less than typical human reaction time. At 120fps it makes the reaction worse by 5-10%. But if you shoot in bursts it doesn't matter, you just need to start a burst upfront.
> 
> I've shot concerts/action, looking through the OVF for hours. It causes me neck pain unless I adjust a monopod or my own position very carefully. But even if my neck is ok I get a sore eye. It's not so good to use only one eye for hours. So this point comes down to very specific individual preferences. Next time maybe I'll try LCD/LiveView for action on the R5 and its allegedly fantastic autofocus, but there will be no opportunities till the end of the year due to corona.



You make a false assumption that at 120 fps there are not multiple frame in the pipeline simultaneously.


----------



## rwvaughn (Jul 21, 2020)

degos said:


> We won't be able to infer that until two or three years from now.
> 
> Canon doesn't release sales figures for individual models. We don't know how R5 were pre-ordered, it could have been 10,000 or a million. We don't know how that compares to 5D4 pre-sales.
> 
> But we do know that the majority of Canon users have not ordered an R5.



I stand by my statement. The market is bigger than just Canon. The overall market is pushing the industry to mirrorless bodies. Canon follows the industry or falls behind. They aren't going to fall behind so they produced the best product. Nikon and Sony's lenses do not even touch the new RF glass.


----------



## mpb001 (Jul 21, 2020)

Well, I guess I will just keep shooting with my 5DIV. Im not too interested in an R series body. If I decide to try one, I can always rent one first. Im not a fan of battery dependent EVFs, especially when you must make sure the camera is on. Lots of shots to be missed with that.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

arbitrage said:


> I owned every 5 series from 5D2 to present but I'd never even consider buying another 5D after enjoying the MILC benefits over the past 2.5 years. For sure there would be many who still would but I think Canon is making the right move to end it here (if this rumor is correct).



2.5 years? The EOS R was only released in October 2018, 21 months ago.


----------



## degos (Jul 21, 2020)

rwvaughn said:


> I stand by my statement. The market is bigger than just Canon. The overall market is pushing the industry to mirrorless bodies. Canon follows the industry or falls behind. They aren't going to fall behind so they produced the best product. Nikon and Sony's lenses do not even touch the new RF glass.



I've no objections to using mirrorless but I think it's inaccurate to say that the market is choosing. When there are so few manufacturers of professional cameras, they have the overwhelming power to shape the market to fit their strategy.

Why can't Canon just release a roadmap of future bodies? Why always so secret? Why does this site even have to exist? Because that gives them the power to influence purchasing decisions *now*.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Isn't that the same thing as letting buyers (the market) decide?



Not exactly. It's more about giving the market choices they didn't even know they wanted by understanding your potential buyers better than they understand themselves and offering products that you know they will choose before they realize they even want them.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jul 21, 2020)

Its just dawned on me that this "leek / press release" might just be Canon marketing team mis-information to help R5 / R6 sales. IE get used to this...it's the new future...like it or lump it. However...those new / nearly new 5D4 cams are looking really good value against the Rf camera. I think Canon will have a backlash from the huge amounts of pros and semi pros who have a strong desire to stay SLR. I feel uncomfortable having my shooting choice manipulated or dictated to by a corporation.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 21, 2020)

I’d say Canon don’t plan to produce a 5DV but if they see a demand for it they can easily produce it. It would probably be a minor upgrade to a later sensor (higher MP) and focusing system.
I think there will be a cohort who want OVF and the longer battery life. The EF Mount lens will be widely available for years to come. Adapters are a nuisance. Let’s see what happens. I still love my 5DIV. If I don’t get a photo right it’s definitely not the 5DIV’s fault.


----------



## hollybush (Jul 21, 2020)

degos said:


> Why can't Canon just release a roadmap of future bodies? Why always so secret? Why does this site even have to exist? Because that gives them the power to influence purchasing decisions *now*.



No-one's making you buy. The mushrooming that's going on does indeed colour my attitudes to the companies doing it (Canon is not the only one) and make me less likely to buy their products. One option is not to buy *anyone's* camera products.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

yoms said:


> This is really a sad move from Canon. And stupid too. And somehow so careless towards their DSLR users. I understand mirrorless cameras are the future, but why making a switch like this? Why do not provide us with an overlap between similarly spec'd DSLR and mirrorless cameras so that we can compare, use both and decide how to make the transition (if ever so)



$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

highdesertmesa said:


> So much talk about not getting a 5D5 but so little talk about what the OVF product in development might be. If it's taking any length of time to develop, then we can expect something novel:
> 
> 
> An DSLR with a switch-flip to locks up the mirror and pops up an EVF in the viewfinder. Because right now the biggest drawback of the 1DX3 is having to use the rear screen in live view to get mirrorless-level AF performance.
> ...



The OVF AF system in the 1D X Mark III is not a typical PDAF line sensor like every previous Canon AF SLR/DSLR. 

It's actually another small CMOS sensor that does AF in the exact same way that mirrorless cameras do. 

The only disadvantages are 1) possible alignment issues - is the secondary CMOS sensor the same optical distance from the lens as the main imaging sensor? and 2) lower resolution than the main imaging sensor. An advantage, though, is that it is monochromatic with no Bayer mask. This somewhat makes up for the lower resolution, gives it more sensitivity on a pixel size basis than if it had a Bayer mask, and also allows faster processing of the information it collects. The RGB+IR light meter is a THIRD CMOS sensor that feeds color information to the AF processor as well as provides metering information.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> 1Dx sR anyone?



In proper Canon syntax that would be '1D Xs R'


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> You make a false assumption that at 120 fps there are not multiple frame in the pipeline simultaneously.



I didn't make that assumption, moreover, I highlighted the possibility of multithreading.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I just remember the 7D2 vanishing overnight.
> 
> It was there, then it was gone.
> 
> Maybe the 5D4 will be a different story, but with the big push to mirrorless I wouldn't be surprised to see the same thing happen to the 5D4.



The 7D Mark II is still in the catalog. It just changed from the original SKU number (#9128B002 ) to a new SKU (#9128B126 ) because they include the WiFi card with it now.






B&H Photo Video Digital Cameras, Photography, Computers


Shop Digital Cameras, 35MM Camera Equipment, Photography, Photo Printers, Computers, Home Theater, Authorized Dealer Canon, Sony, Nikon, Apple, Olympus, Panasonic, Kodak, JBL




www.bhphotovideo.com










B&H Photo Video Digital Cameras, Photography, Computers


Shop Digital Cameras, 35MM Camera Equipment, Photography, Photo Printers, Computers, Home Theater, Authorized Dealer Canon, Sony, Nikon, Apple, Olympus, Panasonic, Kodak, JBL




www.bhphotovideo.com









__





Shop Canon Consumer Catalog, Cameras | Canon U.S.A, Inc.


Shop our selection of Consumer Catalog, . Explore specs, colors, and other features from Canon U.S.A., Inc. to find the right product for your n




www.usa.canon.com


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I didn't make that assumption, moreover, I highlighted the possibility of multithreading.



It has nothing to do with multithreading or not. Just because a screen refreshes at 120Hz does not mean what struck the sensor 8.3 milliseconds ago is now being displayed. There is still lag between the sensor and the VF to allow for processing of the sensor data to a viewable image.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 21, 2020)

RBSfphoto said:


> I think we still have to see how it performs on an r5 but on my eos it performs as well if not faster to focus than on my 5ds or my mark iv. Have had zero issues using all my ef glass on the R. I have been doing this for a living for over 30 years, I tend to be more of a studio shooter , but in my personal work shoot travel, street photography and live music. what I have hated about the r is the lack of a joystick and a scroll wheel everything else I like better than my dslr's . I have not found the evf to be an issue at all even shooting live concerts, at this point, when i grab a camera it is mirrorless, I have a fuji system, a leica q, and the eos r, all the other dslrs sit on the shelf. I am happy to see the r and d go to improving the mirrorless experience for those that want to keep shooting dslr's we won't run of any on the used market anytime soon. No shortage of film cameras for sale used either. If nothing else pentax is committed to dslrs so you could switch systems.



I agree with you to an extent, though some might quibble over the term "perform." The benefits of using an EF lens on the R include the near WYSIWYG exposure, the better AF for static/barely moving subjects (which includes the enhanced AI Servo making f/1.2 easy now), and, for those so inclined, the excellent alignment triangles for manual focusing.

There are two negatives, however, that might fall under the term "perform." Most obviously, the ergonomics. The size and weight of the R, combined with the extra length given to lenses by the adapater, do make a significant difference in how certain lenses handle. Personally, I switched to the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS because, on the R with the adapter, I could not hold it properly in portrait mode. Of course this affects different people in different ways, but ergonomics are assoicated with performance.

The more subtle performance issue relates to High-Speed display, which Canon says "is more responsive, making it easier to follow fast-moving subjects." High-Speed display is only available for *RF* lenses on the EOS R. (Page 149, User Guide) Will this be the same on the new bodies? If not, will better processing make up for it to a significant degree?


----------



## AEWest (Jul 21, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> For a new 5DV to sell well, it would need to be released in late 2021 to allow all the R5 people to migrate if they were going to. It would need to include:
> - all the R5 bits (excluding EVF)
> - the AF system from the 1DXII
> - extended video recording limits due to bigger/better heat dissipation
> ...


Why would anyone pay more for a camera with an obsolete mount and inferior AF system?


----------



## londonxt (Jul 21, 2020)

I think the big clue is the motive behind the RF mount, it was always sold to us by Canon Management as equal to the revoluationary move to EF, where Nikon suffered by tying itself to legacy specs for too long. To me it just doesnt sound like they want RF to be an option, but the only option. The question then it does it make sense to put money into developing a DSLR with an RF mount, technically or economically speaking.


----------



## yeahright (Jul 21, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> It has nothing to do with multithreading or not. Just because a screen refreshes at 120Hz does not mean what struck the sensor 8.3 milliseconds ago is now being displayed. There is still lag between the sensor and the VF to allow for processing of the sensor data to a viewable image.


It does indeed have something to do with multithreading. Because for an image to take longer than 1/(EVF refresh rate) from capture to display, a pipeline is required through which the images travel while being buffered and processed for display. And such a pipeline is inherently a multithreaded construction.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

yeahright said:


> It does indeed have something to do with multithreading. Because for an image to take longer than 1/(EVF refresh rate) from capture to display, a pipeline is required through which the images travel while being buffered and processed for display. And such a pipeline is inherently a multithreaded construction.



You still can't go instantly from readout to display. The processing in between takes time. There's no way a 120Hz system will display on the EVF what happened only 8.33 milliseconds earlier on the sensor.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 21, 2020)

chik0240 said:


> Ok, that's a sad enough news for me. Personally I can understand the financial standpoint of that and I agree that the R5 and R6 looks to have such impressive spec.
> 
> But personally I likely will stick to my 5D III for much longer time before I would change to mirrorless, after all acquiring all those L glass is not a cheap and easy thing to do, it takes me around 10 years to buy all those I would like to have, and I am absolutely not changing all those to the RF for better IQ than the already very good EF L glass. and while the EOS R5 and R6 are guaranteed to work great with adapted EF lens, now the native mount tie to me is gone and I am open to other brand mirrorless as most have some kind of fully working EF lens adapter ready on the market. Likely I will wait for Sigma Foven MILC or try the panasonic or Leica colour when I feel the price performance is ready. now personally the game is open for me to see which system I will go next, the RF lenses to me is way to big for those crazy spec and far too expensive to make me jump directly into it


You may go to Leica because the RF is too expensive?!!


----------



## Joules (Jul 21, 2020)

londonxt said:


> . The question then it does it make sense to put money into developing a DSLR with an RF mount, technically or economically speaking.


And the answer to that is obviously no. Fitting a mirror into the small space in front of the sensor introduces challenges that require compromising other design aspects.

Otherwise, we would have seen such a camera already.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> It has nothing to do with multithreading or not. Just because a screen refreshes at 120Hz does not mean what struck the sensor 8.3 milliseconds ago is now being displayed. There is still lag between the sensor and the VF to allow for processing of the sensor data to a viewable image.



We're returning to the old discussion - I recall we even had timeline diagrams drawn.

The lag can't be more than the EVF refresh rate, or you won't be able to feed the EVF unless there's some multithreading happening.

On the practical sense, 60fps is already smoother than human eye can distinguish, so making a 120fps EVF wouldn't make any difference if the lag was more than 1/120s.
In other words, it's 120fps in order to make the lag less than 1/120s.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I agree wholeheartedly with the rest of your comment, but for this I'd just say, I photographed the comet 2 nights ago and it was fine. 180mm f/2.8, no tracking, a stack of 28x~3sec exposures brought out adequate detail. I would like to try with a tracking mount, but the northern sky is so bright here (partly due to the time of year, partly where I am due to light pollution), I'm not sure how much better it would be.



When an astronomical object is that far north, a tracking mount is less critical than when it's near the equator. The apparent motion of the celestial sphere is least at the poles and greatest at the equator.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

slclick said:


> I think the real question is whether there will be a thread named:
> 
> There will not be an EOS 5D Mark V [CR3]



if so it will be this thread as he would just upgrade the CR4 rating of this one.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

scyrene said:


> What you're saying is - 5DX!!!



Or, more properly, 5D X


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

hoodlum said:


> Last November they predicted Olympus closure in 8 months.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Olympus didn't close. They sold their consumer camera division to another company.


----------



## yeahright (Jul 21, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> We're returning to the old discussion - I recall we even had timeline diagrams drawn.
> 
> The lag can't be more than the EVF refresh rate, or you won't be able to feed the EVF unless there's some multithreading happening.
> 
> ...


well, for any lag between capture and display (while being processed in a pipeline), an increase of the capture and viewfinder frame rate would also reduce the (average) lag from action to display. Even if the lag from capture to display is as long as 1/30 s, then the average lag from action taking place to display on a 60 fps display is 1/(30 Hz) + 1/(2*60 Hz) = 0.0417 s, and on a 120 fps display it is only 1/(30 Hz) + 1/(2*120 Hz) = 0.0375 s, because the expected instant of occurance of the action is always halfway between captures. But the larger the lag from capture to display, the less gain you get by increasing the frame rate in the viewfinder. In this numeric example it is minimal. So the 120 Hz could either be because lag from capture to display is really down to around 1/(120 Hz), or it is merely a number for marketing but without much actual sense.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 21, 2020)

Pixel said:


> ....AND the bigger sensor of the R5 is definitely going to magnify the flaws of older and lower resolution EF lenses.



The R5 has a Medium Format sensor?


----------



## Ale_F (Jul 21, 2020)

Canon release M6mkII and 90Dtogether , why not R5 and 5DV at the same time?


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 21, 2020)

yoms said:


> This is really a sad move from Canon. And stupid too. And somehow so careless towards their DSLR users...



Certainly for those who prefer OVF, this is sad. But "stupid" on Canon's part? When times are tough and very competitive for a business, tough decisions are not made lightly. Yes, some customers are going to be disappointed, and some employees are going to be either let go or transferred. Factories must be reconfigured. But consider how much turmoil the photography industry has gone through in the past 20 years and how well Canon has done relative to the still-standing competition.

Reducing menu size, offering what sells best and can be produced and served (distributed) with coherent marketing seems a pretty standard, prudent move in the kind of business environment we live in today. Succesful in the long run? Can't say yet. But "stupid"?

PS I used to feel like you about EVF. I got the R so I could shoot the incredible rf 50mm f/1.2L. Sold my 5DIV with no regrets. (I definitely regret selling my ef 100-400mm II, but I needed the money!)


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 21, 2020)

Joules said:


> And the answer to that is obviously no. Fitting a mirror into the small space in front of the sensor introduces challenges that require compromising other design aspects.
> 
> Otherwise, we would have seen such a camera already.


We have. It's called a DSLR.


----------



## drama (Jul 21, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Certainly for those who prefer OVF, this is sad. But "stupid" on Canon's part? When times are tough and very competitive for a business, tough decisions are not made lightly. Yes, some customers are going to be disappointed, and some employees are going to be either let go or transferred. Factories must be reconfigured. But consider how much turmoil the photography industry has gone through in the past 20 years and how well Canon has done relative to the still-standing competition.
> 
> Reducing menu size, offering what sells best and can be produced and served (distributed) with coherent marketing seems a pretty standard, prudent move in the kind of business environment we live in today. Succesful in the long run? Can't say yet. But "stupid"?
> 
> PS I used to feel like you about EVF. I got the R so I could shoot the incredible rf 50mm f/1.2L. Sold my 5DIV with no regrets. (I definitely regret selling my ef 100-400mm II, but I needed the money!)



Seconded on this. Canon have made it clear that the R system is their future. The 5D IV as people keep saying is an incredible camera. It's also one that is STILL AVAILABLE. It remains a compelling choice for photographers who want the feature set that it offers.

It seems there's a false equivalence in fans minds that the R5 should somehow also be offered as a DSLR, and therefore the 5D V or whatever. At this point, a 5D series with a bigger sensor, or better video would have to compromise something more - data speeds, image capture speed, frame size, etc etc. 

Those feeling the sting of it ending - this is also beneficial to Canon, and a calculated business move. By releasing compelling R products, they are encouraging you to switch. And in so doing, upgrading your system and feeding the profits. Thats how businesses work. You as a consumer don't need to do that. You still have access to a 5D IV, and it still remains an amazing camera. If you want faster, bigger, and better - then it's time to make the switch.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

yeahright said:


> So the 120 Hz could either be because lag from capture to display is really down to around 1/(120 Hz), or it is merely a number for marketing but without much actual sense.



As above, in terms of multithreading, if it's used, then it's used to speed up the delivery to the closest frame update, not to stretch processing across several frames.
Image processing, especially 2D, is very well parallelisable.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 21, 2020)

yeahright said:


> well, for any lag between capture and display (while being processed in a pipeline), an increase of the capture and viewfinder frame rate would also reduce the (average) lag from action to display. Even if the lag from capture to display is as long as 1/30 s, then the average lag from action taking place to display on a 60 fps display is 1/(30 Hz) + 1/(2*60 Hz) = 0.0417 s, and on a 120 fps display it is only 1/(30 Hz) + 1/(2*120 Hz) = 0.0375 s, because the expected instant of occurance of the action is always halfway between captures. But the larger the lag from capture to display, the less gain you get by increasing the frame rate in the viewfinder. In this numeric example it is minimal. So the 120 Hz could either be because lag from capture to display is really down to around 1/(120 Hz), or it is merely a number for marketing but without much actual sense.



I have a much simpler example to show how EVF fps isn't necessarily the biggest contributor to the lag: I film a 40 second 4k 120fps clip, stop recording and hand you the camera. You then watch that clip through the EVF.
120 fps input, 120 fps output on the EVF and for some reason there's like a minute of lag between the light hitting the sensor and you seing it displayed on the EVF.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I'm not sure what an R1 gets you except a bigger battery.



I agree with most of your post, but I'd just whisper here: the ergonomics of a big body, and top-notch durability.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> I have a much simpler example to show how EVF fps isn't necessarily the biggest contributor to the lag: I film a 40 second 4k 120fps clip, stop recording and hand you the camera. You then watch that clip through the EVF.
> 120 fps input, 120 fps output on the EVF and for some reason there's like a minute of lag between the light hitting the sensor and you seing it displayed on the EVF.



This example is totally irrelevant to the problem in question.
Hint: of you wanted to introduce a one minute delay _inside_ the camera, you'd have to store 1 minute of 120fps video in a huge internal memory buffer.
Or write and read it at the same time to/from a memory card.


----------



## Fran Decatta (Jul 21, 2020)

achelseaphotographer said:


> are you on crack? "in low light situations MLC focus better" that statement is so out of whack with reality that it is laughable, and yet people who drank the kool-aid love repeating it



I've been working with DSLR for years, The past year I changed to eos R, I did about 30 weddings in all this period, and the difference was abismal. I can say at 100% and I will repeat it  mirrorless cameras works a lot better than DSLR to do autofocus in low light conditions. Much faster and accurate  Peace


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 21, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> This example is totally irrelevant to the problem in question.
> Hint: of you wanted to introduce a one minute delay _inside_ the camera, you'd have to store 1 minute of 120fps video in a huge internal memory buffer.
> Or write and read it at the same time to/from a memory card.



And that's exactly the point we're trying to get accross: there are buffers between the sensor and the EVF! No amount of magic multithreading is going to fix that.


----------



## Fran Decatta (Jul 21, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> If you are in a studio, or always shooting with speedlites, with AF assist, etc. do you really care about low light performance?
> 
> Mirrorless offers more for a lot of folks, but for some, that which is new isn't a big deal to how/what they shoot. So the return on investment is not justified. They may just sit on what they have until Canon gives them an improvement in the platform they prefer to use.
> 
> - A



Good to know that point! Thanks!


----------



## Skux (Jul 21, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> In the practical sense, 60fps is already smoother than human eye can distinguish, so making a 120fps EVF wouldn't make any difference if the lag was more than 1/120s.
> In other words, it's 120fps in order to make the lag less than 1/120s.



This is completely false. The difference between 60fps and 120fps is night and day, ask any PC gamer.


----------



## yeahright (Jul 21, 2020)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but to me, the positions are as follows:

@Quarkcharmed acknowledges the theoretical possiblility of a pipeline/buffer for a series of multiple images during processing for the viewfinder etc. and a lag of more than 1/(EVF frame rate), but highly doubts that it is actually implemented. One of the arguments for that position is: why bother implementing a 120 Hz viewfinder, which is much faster than the human eye can follow, if not for the main reason that the total lag from capture to display is already LESS than 1/(EVF frame rate), so that the 120 Hz actually make sense.

@koenkooi on the other hand believes that processing an image from capture to display will take MUCH longer than 1/(120 Hz) = 8.333 ms, so it is inevitable that there is extensive buffering of multiple images involved.

And I really have no idea which one of these positions is closer to the truth. While a multithreaded pipeline buffering images from stage to stage seems the most logical thing to implement, because virtually every sort of signal (and therefore also image) processing generally involves multiple stages for amplification, filtering, corrections, etc. and it seems quite natural to implement every such stage as a single thread receiving the image from the previous stage, processing it, and storing it in a buffer that is handed to the next stage. And buffers in the range of a few images with the size of the EVF do not seem overly memory extensive to me. On the other hand, a processing time of over 8 ms for a single image just for (relatively) low-res display does also seem ample to me, but I am not in real-time image processing. Since no compression algorithms are involved, but (likely) rather some very basic processing stages, I do not feel that this requires necessarily more than 8 ms per image.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 21, 2020)

It was inevitable that Canon would not introduce a 5DV while the R5 is fresh. Canon obviously want to milk the mirrorless RF mount as much as they can, I just hope they are going to throw Sony a few quid for reinvigorating a mature ILC market with the "mirrorless" concept.

The title of this thread is at odds with Canon going on record as stating that they are continuing to support and develop the EF mount going forwards. Given what Canon have already published I think this rumour should have read " There will not be a 5DV for a while"  And that's not at all surprising.

The 5DIV is more than capable, pretty future proof, and probably not going to be under brand rivalry pressure to update as no doubt Nikon will be acting in the same way.

Canon will know that once people by the R series they will get the urge to buy dedicated RF lenses eventually, and so they can resell lenses that are now sat in a very mature and stagnating market, all over again. Smart business move ! Over the next two years the market will decide when or whether we get a 5DV IMHO.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> And that's exactly the point we're trying to get accross: there are buffers between the sensor and the EVF! No amount of magic multithreading is going to fix that.



Your system must be able to process captured frames in less than 1/120s, or it won't be able to feed your EVF at 120fps. Introducing additional buffers to store more frames (in your example - thousands) is absolutely meaningless.


----------



## yeahright (Jul 21, 2020)

Skux said:


> This is completely false. The difference between 60fps and 120fps is night and day, ask any PC gamer.


why is it then that movies are never shown at such high frame rates but usually well below 60 Hz, if there's so much difference even after passing 60 Hz?


----------



## scyrene (Jul 21, 2020)

AEWest said:


> Why would anyone pay more for a camera with an obsolete mount and inferior AF system?



Because your assessment of the two systems isn't shared by everyone? EF isn't obsolete, your EF lenses will still work just as well if and when you get an RF camera. A non-exhaustive list: EF still offers loads of lenses that don't exist in RF (yet or perhaps ever). Some people value things like OVF over other considerations. Some people won't benefit from the new AF system (even if it were objectively better), because they shoot MF, or their use cases are already adequately covered. Some people don't like change.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

yeahright said:


> I do not feel that this requires necessarily more than 8 ms per image.



Most likely some processing is happening during exposure and readout. After it finishes, the EVF switches the buffer (likely it uses alternating buffers).
Specialised CPU like DIGIC with additional instructions for image processing converts sensor raw data into EVF-ready buffer much faster than you think, that is, 8ms time seems to be quite ample and plausible.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 21, 2020)

yeahright said:


> why is it then that movies are never shown at such high frame rates but usually well below 60 Hz, if there's so much difference even after passing 60 Hz?



For one, people are accustomed to the look of 24p in movies and 30p in TV, and think 60p "looks weird".


----------



## keetyUK (Jul 21, 2020)

yeahright said:


> why is it then that movies are never shown at such high frame rates but usually well below 60 Hz, if there's so much difference even after passing 60 Hz?



Because people are trained to watch at 24fps. Look at the fallout the Hobbit films received for shooting at 60fps... it looks hyper real and people dont like it.

Anyone saying there isnt a difference between 60hz and 120hz has clearly never seen them side by side, its night and day difference.

Tom Cruise was even part of a push to get people to turn off motion smoothing (interpolate 24fps films up to 60) because it interfered with how the movie makers wanted the films to look


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

Skux said:


> This is completely false. The difference between 60fps and 120fps is night and day, ask any PC gamer.



60fps and 120fps of what, your monitor refresh rate or what a game can deliver?
If the game delivers say 120fps consistently, your perception is limited by the monitor refresh rate, but more by biology and how human eye retina works. So you'll see a huge difference between 30fps and 60fps, but much less of that between 60 and 120.

Also 120 fps give less input lag than 60 that's why hardcore gamers like it.

However when the game internal frame rate is irregular (which happens a lot), 120fps smooth out the irregularities better. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist–Shannon_sampling_theorem

But it's not the case for the photo camera: there's no irregularities/ hiccups in the processing pipeline as it has nothing else to do, just that job. Except after pressing the shutter button.


----------



## mjg79 (Jul 21, 2020)

It's a fascinating debate and good conversation in this thread.

I have both a 5DIV and the R and like them both. I am hoping for a 5DV - I would prefer something along the lines of the Sony A99II, ie smaller and with the benefits of mirrorless tech but retaining the deeper mount for ergonomics with longer glass but would settle for essentially a 5DIV but with the new R5 sensor and IBIS, that shouldn't cost Canon a lot to do, but whether they want to compete with themselves I don't know. Who can deny that from their point of view the best thing would be if we all go out and buy into R system and all new glass?

My issue with mirrorless is really that it seems to suit smaller lenses, 1.8 primes, manual focus glass etc and especially wide angles. With such lenses, no question about it, it's smaller, lighter, higher quality. The little RF 35/1.8 on my R is a great kit. In the Sony world lenses like the 24GM and 16-35 GM, quality control issues aside, are smaller, lighter and better than SLR equivalents. And lenses like the Loxia glass really offer smaller high quality packages.

However with the larger aperture 2.8 zooms and 1.2/1.4 primes (longer than 24mm) it has been so far a different story - not just with Canon but Sony too. Typically fast mirrorless 50s are bigger and heavier than SLR ones. So to give a flavour of where I am, I use the EF 85/1.4 IS L a lot on my 5D. I've tried the RF 85/1.2 on the R. The RF lens is better, the lack of chromatic aberrations at 1.2 is astounding. But it's unpleasant to hold and use simply because of the sheer physics of the lens. I've adapted my 85IS to my R and it's nice but not as balanced as on a 5D. By contrast the 85 on a 5D is a perfectly balanced joy to use. I find the same with my EF 24-70/2.8L II - just perfect. I have tried the RF 24-70 2.8L. Optically I couldn't see much difference though the IS is nice but again in terms of ergonomics it wasn't as nicely balanced on the R.

Maybe the R5 will be different with a deeper grip and better ergonomics? I don't know. Ultimately you can't change physics. I have no intention of selling my EF 24-70 2.8L II so my choice in the future will be either using it adapted or using it on a future 5DV. I imagine quite a few others are in a similar boat as I know many here have huge EF lens collections. I remain sceptical as to whether Canon won't offer one last hurrah of a 5D at some point as I think quite a few people would buy it but who knows. If they brought out a radical update to the 5D along the lines of the Sony A99II it would be a day one pre-order from me.


----------



## navastronia (Jul 21, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> It was inevitable that Canon would not introduce a 5DV while the R5 is fresh. Canon obviously want to milk the mirrorless RF mount as much as they can, I just hope they are going to throw Sony a few quid for reinvigorating a mature ILC market with the "mirrorless" concept.
> 
> The title of this thread is at odds with Canon going on record as stating that they are continuing to support and develop the EF mount going forwards. Given what Canon have already published I think this rumour should have read " There will not be a 5DV for a while"  And that's not at all surprising.
> 
> ...



This follows, except that Canon have updated the 5D line every 3-4 years since it began in 2005. The Mark IV came out in 2016. Now it's 2020, and we have no Mark IV, but we do have an R5. This implies that there is no Mark V coming.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

keetyUK said:


> Anyone saying there isnt a difference between 60hz and 120hz has clearly never seen them side by side, its night and day difference.
> 
> Tom Cruise was even part of a push to get people to turn off motion smoothing (interpolate 24fps films up to 60) because it interfered with how the movie makers wanted the films to look



Jumping from 24 to 60 is quite noticeable in movies. From 60 to 120 - not really.


----------



## Mark3794 (Jul 21, 2020)

More DSLRs: Canon is *******.
No more DSLRs: Canon is more *******.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 21, 2020)

navastronia said:


> This implies that there is no Mark V coming.



... in 2020


----------



## navastronia (Jul 21, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> ... in 2020



I mean . . . yeah, but like . . .


----------



## chik0240 (Jul 21, 2020)

AEWest said:


> You may go to Leica because the RF is too expensive?!!


most likely sigma, I mean for body choice of favour alone L mount seems promising and sigma got a proper EF adapter, personally I love the foveon colour a alot


----------



## AccipiterQ (Jul 21, 2020)

Kiton said:


> From the CFO's point of view, it makes sense for Canon.
> 
> But, the 5d 4 is the best digital camera I have ever owned, I often take the 5d for an assignment over the 1dx 2 (NHL, MLS, CFL games etc aside).
> I have 2x 1dx 2, and I have ordered a R5. Who knows, maybe the auto focus is so good that I will start using the R5 at hockey and football games. Will the legacy 400 2.8 and 300 2.8 be as fast on the R5 as an RF lens? So many unknowns still.
> But, it is too soon to kill the line off, it is Canon's "anchor tenant" so to speak. They should make a 5d mk 5 to ease the transition.



Why do you prefer the 5D4 over the 1DX2? Just curious


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 21, 2020)

drama said:


> They should make a 5d mk 5 to ease the transition.



They DID! Just without the mirror.


----------



## Eclipsed (Jul 21, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Umm, didn't Canon's last film camera have an *eighteen *year production run?



Umm, film doesn't obsolete itself every three to five years the way digital technology always has.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 21, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Because your assessment of the two systems isn't shared by everyone? EF isn't obsolete, your EF lenses will still work just as well if and when you get an RF camera. A non-exhaustive list: EF still offers loads of lenses that don't exist in RF (yet or perhaps ever). Some people value things like OVF over other considerations. Some people won't benefit from the new AF system (even if it were objectively better), because they shoot MF, or their use cases are already adequately covered. Some people don't like change.


But why would you pay MORE for a camera that could only take EF lenses, has inferior AF, and no IBIS? 

The post I quoted said that the new DSLR would cost more than the R5. Even if I wanted a DSLR, the limitations means to me that the camera should cost less than the mirrorless, not more.


----------



## mjg79 (Jul 21, 2020)

AEWest said:


> But why would you pay MORE for a camera that could only take EF lenses, has inferior AF, and no IBIS?
> 
> The post I quoted said that the new DSLR would cost more than the R5. Even if I wanted a DSLR, the limitations means to me that the camera should cost less than the mirrorless, not more.



If for example you like using a fast 85mm lens, an EF mount camera is in my opinion miles better in terms of ergonomics. A 5D with the EF 85L IS is much, much nicer to hold and use for prolonged periods than the R with the RF 85/1.2 - I've used both, and for general photography for fun the EF mount would win every time in terms of ergonomics. Now the RF lens is sharper and better corrected, but inevitably the combination is front heavy. Some people work well with that, holding the lens, others prefer the camera and lens more balanced.

I'm not generally bashing mirrorless. For use with a 1.8 or 2.8 prime? For use with lenses 24mm and wider? For use with small manual focus glass? The R is better, indeed makes things possible an SLR can't. But a fast 50 or 85? An 85/1.4? A 24-70/2.8? For those the EF mount is often ergonomically superior because the centre of balance is further forward, towards the middle of the combination. So far anyway that seems to be the case with Sony and Canon lenses, nobody has yet made a 1.4 or 1.2 35, 50 or 85 that didn't end up being big and heavy on mirrorless. 24mm is a different story. 16-35 different. 1.8 is different. But the Sony 50/1.4 and Canon 50/1.2, both excellent lenses are quite awkward, in my view anyway and I've tried both and own the Canon, because the lens gets so big and the camera is thin and the centre of balance is so far forward.

I imagine there are other reasons others would have but that's a large part of the reason I would like a 5DV to keep using some of my EF lenses with a future camera.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 21, 2020)

mjg79 said:


> If for example you like using a fast 85mm lens, an EF mount camera is in my opinion miles better in terms of ergonomics. A 5D with the EF 85L IS is much, much nicer to hold and use for prolonged periods than the R with the RF 85/1.2 - I've used both, and for general photography for fun the EF mount would win every time in terms of ergonomics. Now the RF lens is sharper and better corrected, but inevitably the combination is front heavy. Some people work well with that, holding the lens, others prefer the camera and lens more balanced.
> 
> I'm not generally bashing mirrorless. For use with a 1.8 or 2.8 prime? For use with lenses 24mm and wider? For use with small manual focus glass? The R is better, indeed makes things possible an SLR can't. But a fast 50 or 85? An 85/1.4? A 24-70/2.8? For those the EF mount is often ergonomically superior because the centre of balance is further forward, towards the middle of the combination. So far anyway that seems to be the case with Sony and Canon lenses, nobody has yet made a 1.4 or 1.2 35, 50 or 85 that didn't end up being big and heavy on mirrorless. 24mm is a different story. 16-35 different. 1.8 is different. But the Sony 50/1.4 and Canon 50/1.2, both excellent lenses are quite awkward, in my view anyway and I've tried both and own the Canon, because the lens gets so big and the camera is thin and the centre of balance is so far forward.
> 
> I imagine there are other reasons others would have but that's a large part of the reason I would like a 5DV to keep using some of my EF lenses with a future camera.


You raise good points. But would you pay a premium for the DSLR vs mirrorless given its other limitations?


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I agree with most of your post, but I'd just whisper here: the ergonomics of a big body, and top-notch durability.


And a 20 mp sensor.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 21, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Aren't pro PC gamers asking for way faster than even that with input lag, monitor lag, etc.? Why would wildlifers be any different? Wouldn't some want to nail the decisive moment and not necessarily rely on having the machine gun going throughout a window of possible activity?
> 
> I hear you, though, I personally don't need some absurd 300 Hz refresh to do what I do... but some folks may be chasing a more perfectly realtime experience.
> 
> - A




Me being a huge PC nerd as well, I can confirm. I think a lot of it is overblown in the PC world and just like everything else - personal preference and potential bragging rights.

I'm a 32" 4K 60hz guy myself. lol


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 21, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> Quarkcharmed, that might work for your concerts, but the problem with EVF lag is more about
> 1) the cumulative delay
> 2) after a series of burst shots
> 3) on a moving target
> ...



Granted, I have not shot with any of these mirrorless cams yet, but we’ve been shooting TV with EVF’s forever and digital cinema for like two decades. All of the fast moving, tight shots from sporting events that you’re watching on TV are from cameras with EVF’s. All of the stuff from NFL Films for probably the last five years has been digital, meaning EVF’s. I think some may be making a mountain out of a mole hill over the viewfinders.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 21, 2020)

yoms said:


> provide us with an overlap between similarly spec'd DSLR and mirrorless cameras




You could make that argument for the rest of your life - at what point do you stop?

When the R9 comes out with a 182MP noiseless sensor and 150 FPS you could say the same thing then. Just one more 'overlap'...


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> Granted, I have not shot with any of these mirrorless cams yet, but we’ve been shooting TV with EVF’s forever and digital cinema for like two decades. All of the fast moving, tight shots from sporting events that you’re watching on TV are from cameras with EVF’s. All of the stuff from NFL Films for probably the last five years has been digital, meaning EVF’s. I think some may be making a mountain out of a mole hill over the viewfinders.


Stills vs. Video. Two different animals. For video you need a viewfinder that allows you to follow the action, but stopping that action is irrelevant. For stills, you need a viewfinder that lets you stop the action. Any lag time between what you see and what is happening in the viewfinder can cause you to miss the peak of action.

Very simple portrait example: Ballplayer standing in front of the camera tossing the ball in the air and catching it with their glove. With video, you just record the whole sequence. With stills you need to watch to see when the ball hits the peak and snap the shot, any lag or delay and you miss the shot.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 21, 2020)

sanj said:


> What would be the 'learn to adjust to mirrorless'? It would be nice to list these.




Liked this post AND wanted to post and say your photography in your signature link is outstanding. It made my morning. Keep shooting bro, I'm going to go throw all my gear off the roof.


----------



## mjg79 (Jul 21, 2020)

AEWest said:


> You raise good points. But would you pay a premium for the DSLR vs mirrorless given its other limitations?



A fair question. I don't know the answer really. It would depend a bit on what they offer.

If they simple shoehorn the R5 sensor into the 5DIV body and tweak a few things, the situation you highlight would arise, it might make people resent paying more as SLRs do cost more to manufacture. Having said that the sensor R&D costs have already been spent.

What I would prefer is Canon to take the A99II approach, using a pellicle mirror which would allow a "best of both worlds" approach as EVF tech is now so good I think the need for an OVF is reducing. If that was the case I could accept a higher price if it meant I could seamlessly use my EF glass for many years.

I suspect if a 5DV ever comes it will be more along the lines of the 5DIV with the new sensor so yeah I do agree with you that that would present a marketing headache. Maybe they will simply give it a year, let the R5 get the glory this year and then next year give us a 5DV.

I think this sort of financial and customer based discussion will be what drives Canon rather than the sort of technical based discussion on here. Put simply, do those who have a giant collection of EF glass want to 1) replace it with RF glass? Or 2) use an adapter for some to mix and match on an RF mount camera? Or 3) prefer to buy another EF mount camera to carry on as before.

If you just read the internet forums then one would think groups 1 and 2 would be 90% of the population! But to the average user? I don't know. There are more EF mount lenses out there than RF mount lenses. That will still be the case in 5 years and probably 10 years from now. Will canon really not give those millions of people a new EF mount camera? I've tried the adapter for my R and found it worked well but I would prefer to not adapt. Right now my attitude is I want to keep my EF glass, especially as for example with the 24-70/2.8 there is no big difference in image quality or size/weight whether EF or RF mount, why should I buy the more expensive newer lens? But maybe Canon is smarter than me haha - maybe if they flat out refuse to give us another 5D then I will crack and buy all new RF lenses! I can't claim I would go to Sony instead as I am a Canon fanatic so maybe they will call my bluff!


----------



## degos (Jul 21, 2020)

hollybush said:


> No-one's making you buy. The mushrooming that's going on does indeed colour my attitudes to the companies doing it (Canon is not the only one) and make me less likely to buy their products. One option is not to buy *anyone's* camera products.



Not buying is a good strategy, but usually a point comes where it's necessary to upgrade or replace and the lack of information plays into the manufacturers' hands. 

And conversely they drop little nuggets of information like 'no 5D5' just to give the market a nudge. It's all so cynical and deliberate.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2020)

mjg79 said:


> ...as SLRs do cost more to manufacture...



Not picking on you, but I would like to see this line of reasoning retired once and for all. 

First, no one has any proof this is true.

Second, there are no real world examples of this. The lowest cost Rebel and the lowest cost M that I can find are exactly the same price. 

Third, even if it were true, the mirror assembly can hardly be a major factor in the total cost of a camera if Canon can make and sell DSLRs for $400.

Most importantly though, actual manufacturing costs are just one small consideration in retail pricing. People act like Canon is some guy in his garage, adding 50% to the cost of his parts and labor and selling them in the neighborhood. 

Canon is a massive, multinational business. The embedded costs of thousands of other factors have far more to do with the price consumers pay than the mere cost of any single component. If anyone ever picks up an actual print version of National Geographic anymore, they'd see the full page Canon ad in every issue that by itself costs more than any difference between manufacturing costs of DSLRs and Mirrorless could ever be.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2020)

I think the worst part of this whole rumor is that, if true, it means that there will be nothing interesting on Canon Rumors for the next year. Wake me up when 2021 is over.


----------



## masterpix (Jul 21, 2020)

I hope you were told wrongly, but for some reason I don't think they will make the 5D-V. they do push to mirrorless, they might develop an OVF for the R5 to complement that feature for those who prefer the OVF over EVF. The qustion that OVF fans live with is: where do I get the cash to buy the 1Dx? Although the R5 is very apealing, still the EVF is the "deal breaker" for "old fashion" that like to SEE the light from the other side of the lens.


----------



## mjg79 (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Not picking on you, but I would like to see this line of reasoning retired once and for all.
> 
> First, no one has any proof this is true.
> 
> ...



That's all very logical. I was guilty of just repeating something I often see online to the point where I assumed it would be true. Of course the whole thing with the complexity of manufacturing, regulation and economies of scale often makes it impossible for the average man to work out the "true cost" of things.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 21, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I don't own an RF body, but I'm curious to see what people use control rings the most for.
> 
> In my mind, since I am largely an aperture priority shooter on my 5D3, I have fast dedicated dials for aperture and exposure comp. I also have a joystick for the AF point. So I'm guessing I'd use that control ring for the fourth most common thing I adjust on the fly. Either ISO or min shutter speed (when shooting in Auto ISO) certainly come to mind as potential candidates.
> 
> - A




I use mine for ISO, and I use the slider bar (which I'm alone in liking) for changing focus zones.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 21, 2020)

masterpix said:


> I hope you were told wrongly, but for some reason I don't think they will make the 5D-V. they do push to mirrorless, they might develop an OVF for the R5 to complement that feature for those who prefer the OVF over EVF. The qustion that OVF fans live with is: where do I get the cash to buy the 1Dx? Although the R5 is very apealing, still the EVF is the "deal breaker" for "old fashion" that like to SEE the light from the other side of the lens.


I highly doubt there will some kind of Franken-camera from Canon. It will be either DSLR or mirrorless.


----------



## chik0240 (Jul 21, 2020)

masterpix said:


> I hope you were told wrongly, but for some reason I don't think they will make the 5D-V. they do push to mirrorless, they might develop an OVF for the R5 to complement that feature for those who prefer the OVF over EVF. The qustion that OVF fans live with is: where do I get the cash to buy the 1Dx? Although the R5 is very apealing, still the EVF is the "deal breaker" for "old fashion" that like to SEE the light from the other side of the lens.


actually seeing the light than the monitor is a huge deal to eye health, believe me looking at a monitor for hours with high concentration will make your glasses thick quick


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 21, 2020)

navastronia said:


> This follows, except that Canon have updated the 5D line every 3-4 years since it began in 2005. The Mark IV came out in 2016. Now it's 2020, and we have no Mark IV, but we do have an R5. This implies that there is no Mark V coming.



No, it implies that something has entered the stage which has upset the normal four year refresh cycle - the R5. At the time of those four year cycles there wasn't another "5" , now there is. The 5DIV is more than capable of running a six year cycle. As I said earlier, Canon did publicly state the EF was to continue. Without the 5 series that would be a pretty hollow promise. I guess hard-nosed Canon may try to push us 5 series DSLR users into the 1D camp, but it wouldn't work with me, unless the 1D series became modular like the original EOS 1 film cameras.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Jul 21, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> You could make that argument for the rest of your life - at what point do you stop?
> 
> When the R9 comes out with a 182MP noiseless sensor and 150 FPS you could say the same thing then. Just one more 'overlap'...


Uh??? Nonsense.
To my knowledge, it doesn't happen so often that there's a whole new system...


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 21, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> 60fps and 120fps of what, your monitor refresh rate or what a game can deliver?
> If the game delivers say 120fps consistently, your perception is limited by the monitor refresh rate, but more by biology and how human eye retina works. So you'll see a huge difference between 30fps and 60fps, but much less of that between 60 and 120.
> 
> Also 120 fps give less input lag than 60 that's why hardcore gamers like it.
> ...



Nyquist is about then information needed to accurately reconstruct a band limited analog signal. And most of those gaming monitors are variable refresh now anyways.

Anyways, the human eye can recognize shapes flashed at 1/200th of a second. Stop thinking of the brain/human perception like a computer—it’s way more complicated. A 120fps 6mp EVF is not at human perception limits.


----------



## Steve Dmark2 (Jul 21, 2020)

In my opinion there will be no single digit canon DSLR anymore. 1D, 5D, 7D, 6D all buried. About the xxxD and xxD it depends on how Canon treats their M system and how they make successors for the RP. But they will stick around for ~two more years.

Cheers


----------



## Colorado (Jul 21, 2020)

chik0240 said:


> actually seeing the light than the monitor is a huge deal to eye health, believe me looking at a monitor for hours with high concentration will make your glasses thick quick


Just an FYI that's a misnomer. Old CRT monitors had an image projected from the back (the tube) onto a transparent screen. So you your eye was focusing on an image on the front of the monitor while simultaneously looking through the transparent screen to the back of the monitor. This was the major source of eye strain and other "I look at a monitor for 8+ hours a day" issues.

LCD (and OLED) displays are not transparent so they don't have this effect on the eye when focusing. There are issues caused by looking at an LCD display for extended periods but it isn't the same as with old picture tube monitors.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 21, 2020)

AEWest said:


> But why would you pay MORE for a camera that could only take EF lenses, has inferior AF, and no IBIS?
> 
> The post I quoted said that the new DSLR would cost more than the R5. Even if I wanted a DSLR, the limitations means to me that the camera should cost less than the mirrorless, not more.



Depends entirely on how much one values the things they prefer in DSLRs. The thinking behind making a 5D5 more expensive than the R5 is to tempt people across to the new system whilst retaining both options. The other approaches would be, offer only mirrorless, or offer a 5D5 at the same or a lower price but without certain key features, like IBIS. Any of these approaches could be sensible, we just don't know the strategy.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 21, 2020)

Colorado said:


> Just an FYI that's a misnomer. Old CRT monitors had an image projected from the back (the tube) onto a transparent screen. So you your eye was focusing on an image on the front of the monitor while simultaneously looking through the transparent screen to the back of the monitor. This was the major source of eye strain and other "I look at a monitor for 8+ hours a day" issues.
> 
> LCD (and OLED) displays are not transparent so they don't have this effect on the eye when focusing. There are issues caused by looking at an LCD display for extended periods but it isn't the same as with old picture tube monitors.


Close. Old tube monitors had an electron gun that shot electrons in a line scan fashion onto phosphors that were on the rear of the tube screen. It was the excited phosphor that was visible to a viewer. Color screens had three guns and three phosphors (RGB).


----------



## amorse (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I think the worst part of this whole rumor is that, if true, it means that there will be nothing interesting on Canon Rumors for the next year. Wake me up when 2021 is over.


I don't know - I'm still pretty curious about the previously rumoured high resolution body - that'll keep me coming back. Also, there was the note in the rumour that there may be development for something to appease OVF/DSLR-demanding users. If the 5D is done and the 1DX III is already out, then I don't know what could be released to appease those users. I'll be curious to see where that goes, if anywhere.


----------



## RBSfphoto (Jul 21, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I agree with you to an extent, though some might quibble over the term "perform." The benefits of using an EF lens on the R include the near WYSIWYG exposure, the better AF for static/barely moving subjects (which includes the enhanced AI Servo making f/1.2 easy now), and, for those so inclined, the excellent alignment triangles for manual focusing.
> 
> There are two negatives, however, that might fall under the term "perform." Most obviously, the ergonomics. The size and weight of the R, combined with the extra length given to lenses by the adapater, do make a significant difference in how certain lenses handle. Personally, I switched to the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS because, on the R with the adapter, I could not hold it properly in portrait mode. Of course this affects different people in different ways, but ergonomics are assoicated with performance.
> 
> The more subtle performance issue relates to High-Speed display, which Canon says "is more responsive, making it easier to follow fast-moving subjects." High-Speed display is only available for *RF* lenses on the EOS R. (Page 149, User Guide) Will this be the same on the new bodies? If not, will better processing make up for it to a significant degree?


first I really have heard about high speed display and does it really make a difference in real life and not just in the specs? I played around with my rf 24-105 and my ef 24-105 today and too be perfectly honest I could not see a difference in the display? if it is there it is so small as to not be really noticeable to me Have you been able to actually see what it means in real life?


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 21, 2020)

Colorado said:


> Just an FYI that's a misnomer. Old CRT monitors had an image projected from the back (the tube) onto a transparent screen. So you your eye was focusing on an image on the front of the monitor while simultaneously looking through the transparent screen to the back of the monitor. This was the major source of eye strain and other "I look at a monitor for 8+ hours a day" issues.
> 
> LCD (and OLED) displays are not transparent so they don't have this effect on the eye when focusing. There are issues caused by looking at an LCD display for extended periods but it isn't the same as with old picture tube monitors.



CRTs weren't transparent—they had a layer of phosphor on the glass that rendered the front of the tube opaque. Otherwise wouldn't you have been able to see the ray gun apparatus in the back of the tube?

But seriously, folks, the amount of random applications of physics being applied here to tell people their perception is incorrect is staggering. OVFs are clearly different than EVFs. There is a real, measurable difference. With a difference means that there will be preferences, so let not crap random physics nuggets on people in order to discredit their preferences.


----------



## Colorado (Jul 21, 2020)

Sorry for the short cut on the physics. Was more replying to the comment "I looked at a monitor a lot, now I have bad eyesight" statement. This is the misnomer. Extensive monitor usage can cause eye strain which can exacerbate existing eye conditions. But it does not cause you to need glasses or need thicker glasses.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2020)

mjg79 said:


> That's all very logical. I was guilty of just repeating something I often see online to the point where I assumed it would be true. Of course the whole thing with the complexity of manufacturing, regulation and economies of scale often makes it impossible for the average man to work out the "true cost" of things.


As I said, I didn't mean to single you out. This is one of those internet myths that forum "experts" postulate and then it gets repeated.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 21, 2020)

Canon should continue to focus on R series. Nikon just introduced Z5 that has 24mp, dual card slots and IBIS for $1,399 body only. 

Canon needs to update the R as the R6 is still quite expensive for many and the existing R is missing some of these key features.


----------



## slclick (Jul 21, 2020)

AEWest said:


> Canon should continue to focus on R series. Nikon just introduced Z5 that has 24mp, dual card slots and IBIS for $1,399 body only.
> 
> Canon needs to update the R as the R6 is still quite expensive for many and the existing R is missing some of these key features.


That Z5 is going to make a lot of Nikonians very happy. If Canon had come out with those specs as opposed to the R, it wouldn't of had such a Beta start into MLC. Good job.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 21, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Liked this post AND wanted to post and say your photography in your signature link is outstanding. It made my morning. Keep shooting bro, I'm going to go throw all my gear off the roof.


He is amazing.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 21, 2020)

Colorado said:


> Sorry for the short cut on the physics. Was more replying to the comment "I looked at a monitor a lot, now I have bad eyesight" statement. This is the misnomer. Extensive monitor usage can cause eye strain which can exacerbate existing eye conditions. But it does not cause you to need glasses or need thicker glasses.


Can also cause early cataracts.


----------



## mppix (Jul 21, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Not even close.
> 
> EF lenses are easily adaptable to RF bodies with no loss of functionality.
> 
> FD lenses were non-compatible with EOS bodies, even with an adapter with optics that was essentially also a TC, in so many ways.



I don't get this comment. First, this was more how Canon introduced the EF mount, less about the technical details. Second, you can adapt FD lenses in general.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 21, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> You could make that argument for the rest of your life - at what point do you stop?



When EVFs really are "just as good" as OVFs, which we've heard every year since they came out. And they're still not.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 21, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> But the vast majority of those 5D Mark V sales would instead eventually be R5 sales if the 5D Mark V is not made. So Canon would have to sell enough 5D Mark V bodies over and above the number of R5 bodies they do not sell because the 5D Mark V body is available in order to recover the additional investment of bringing the 5D Mark V to market.



In fairness, some of those 5D V sales would be to people also buying the R5. I don't know if that would be me, but only because I'm waiting to see Canon's rumored 83mp monster. I've said before that if Canon released a new, higher resolution sensor in DSLR and mirrorless formats I would likely end up with one of each.


----------



## Skux (Jul 21, 2020)

yeahright said:


> why is it then that movies are never shown at such high frame rates but usually well below 60 Hz, if there's so much difference even after passing 60 Hz?



Because it's cheaper. 24fps was chosen as the best compromise between motion quality and cost, and has been the standard ever since the early 1900s.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 21, 2020)

Skux said:


> Because it's cheaper. 24fps was chosen as the best compromise between motion quality and cost, and has been the standard ever since the early 1900s.



Less we forget people are now so used to seeing 24FPS that when higher FPS are tried people dislike it. And now for CGI I am sure it is probably cheeper to render 24 frames rather than 60 or 90 per second.


----------



## Alam (Jul 21, 2020)

Corona start to take toll
I hope XXD line still alive


----------



## BillB (Jul 21, 2020)

tron said:


> SHAME SHAME SHAME! They could let us buyers decide which line we prefer! (Maybe some of us would get both!)


Well, as long as they are selling 5DIV’s for $2500, there is a choice.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 21, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> The lag can't be more than the EVF refresh rate, or you won't be able to feed the EVF unless there's some multithreading happening.



*Throughput:* the number of frames displayed per unit of time. *Latency:* the time it takes to capture, process, and display a single frame. *Refresh:* the rate at which the display 'paints' frames (which is tied to the underlying mechanics of the display and keeping display elements refreshed).

You could theoretically have 120 fps refresh and 1 fps throughput with a 5 second latency. The display will just paint the same frame 120x, and it will just take 5 seconds to see anything when you first activate the system. The EVF refresh rate is no guarantee of either throughput or latency. If I had to guess...

Most EVFs can probably achieve a throughput equal to their advertised refresh in daylight when the camera is not shooting.
Probably all of them experience a severe drop in throughput in low light.
Probably no EVFs have a latency equal to their advertised refresh.
Taking a photograph...especially with a mechanical shutter...introduces a very significant 'bubble' into this pipeline. How the system handles this bubble will depend on latency. But if you see an image instead of a black out then it involves using one or more frames outside the normal latency, and using them for multiple refreshes until the system catches up.
#4 is likely the source of most complaints, including complaints of seeing something like a bird near center of frame when it's really out on the edge. During burst shooting the system just falls further and further behind until you stop shooting and it can resume it's normal processing pipeline. But #3 can be detectable with rapid movement and scene changes. And #2 cannot be ignored for low light shooters.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 21, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> *Throughput:* the number of frames displayed per unit of time. *Latency:* the time it takes to capture, process, and display a single frame. *Refresh:* the rate at which the display 'paints' frames (which is tied to the underlying mechanics of the display and keeping display elements refreshed).
> 
> You could theoretically have 120 fps refresh and 1 fps throughput with a 5 second latency. The display will just paint the same frame 120x, and it will just take 5 seconds to see anything when you first activate the system. The EVF refresh rate is no guarantee of either throughput or latency. If I had to guess...
> 
> ...



Why would the EVF drop frames in low light? Wouldn't you be getting 120fps refresh off the sensor regardless of the light level; just the level of amplification varies?


----------



## Sirkings (Jul 21, 2020)

If im forced to change to the R line (im 5D user from MK I to MKIV)is the adaptor lens good enough to work with the EF lens with this new body ? im very concern about this. Can anyone enlighten on this?


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 21, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> Why would the EVF drop frames in low light? Wouldn't you be getting 120fps refresh off the sensor regardless of the light level; just the level of amplification varies?



Amplification can only go so high and do so much. A 1/120th e-shutter speed (it would probably be a little faster because of delays between read outs while the sensor is reset) would leave a lot of scenes pitch black (or filled with nothing but noise) in the EVF even at the highest ISOs.


----------



## tron (Jul 21, 2020)

BillB said:


> Well, as long as they are selling 5DIV’s for $2500, there is a choice.


the same could have been said for EOS R!


----------



## SteveC (Jul 21, 2020)

Sirkings said:


> If im forced to change to the R line (im 5D user from MK I to MKIV)is the adaptor lens good enough to work with the EF lens with this new body ? im very concern about this. Can anyone enlighten on this?



Optically, the adapter is simply an empty tube,. it does not have a lens in it at all. (All it does is situate the EF lens as far away from the sensor as it would be on an EF body.) Your EF lens will work as well on the R camera as it does on your current camera.

The adapter does one more thing, though; it has to pass control signals from the camera to the lens, and whatever information the lens generates back to the camera, but that's simply pass-through.


----------



## slclick (Jul 21, 2020)

BillB said:


> Well, as long as they are selling 5DIV’s for $2500, there is a choice.


$1877 USD refurbed!


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 21, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> In fairness, some of those 5D V sales would be to people also buying the R5. .


In fact, we really have to see how many people who try the R5 feel any need whatsoever for a unicorn 5DV. Some might; however, many, many more might just say, "Whoa. Where have you been all my life? Who needs a mirror?"


----------



## mppix (Jul 21, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I think the worst part of this whole rumor is that, if true, it means that there will be nothing interesting on Canon Rumors for the next year. Wake me up when 2021 is over.


Disaggree. McKinnon said in a video that more is to come - hinting to bodies. 
My bet would be a high res body, something close to 100MP.
Maybe we may even see an R1 before the olympics.

However, I'm waiting for a pro 35mm (f1.2 or f1.4)


----------



## unfocused (Jul 21, 2020)

slclick said:


> $1877 USD refurbed!


$1999 New USA warranty via CPW. A few weeks ago it was under $1800 and probably will be again.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 21, 2020)

Sirkings said:


> If im forced to change to the R line (im 5D user from MK I to MKIV)is the adaptor lens good enough to work with the EF lens with this new body ? im very concern about this. Can anyone enlighten on this?


Yes. The adapter isn't a lens, but a spacer to make up for the flange distance difference between EF/RF. Your lenses will work perfectly and you'll never have to AFMA again.


----------



## konsolas_captures (Jul 21, 2020)

I think that unfortunately this rumour is going to be 100% true. I don’t think Canon will make a 5DV, not because there is no need for a 5DV or there is no market for it but for the opposite reason. The 5D line is Canon’s best FF line among pros and enthusiasts. If a 5DV was to be announced then can you imagine the impact it would have to the R5’s and R6’s sales? R5 and R6 seem great cameras, actually they seem more than great but they still cannot compare to a 5D successor. Why? Because people know the 5D line, they know what is capable of, they know how well built they are and how reliable they are. So I think between a 5DV with already owned lenses (from every 5D owner) and an R5 most would choose the 5DV. But Canon doesn’t want to give them the choice, for Canon the only path is mirrorless and the RF mount and that’s why the 5D successor is called R5 and the 6D successor is called R6. The good thing is that no one needs to buy new lenses since the EF lenses work pretty well when adapted to an RF camera, at least to the previous models.


----------



## Skux (Jul 21, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Less we forget people are now so used to seeing 24FPS that when higher FPS are tried people dislike it. And now for CGI I am sure it is probably cheeper to render 24 frames rather than 60 or 90 per second.



It's a shame, 24fps has become so culturally ingrained that it feels 'wrong' to use other frame rates for film (see: the backlash The Hobbit got). Imagine an Avengers or Star Trek or Fast & Furious film at 60fps, the detail would be incredible.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 21, 2020)

mppix said:


> However, I'm waiting for a pro 35mm (f1.2 or f1.4)



The ef 35mm f/1.4L II works splendidly on the R. So happy I kept this prime when I sold off most of my EF lenses.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 21, 2020)

konsolas_captures said:


> The good thing is that no one needs to buy new lenses since the EF lenses work pretty well when adapted to an RF camera, at least to the previous models.


Yes but once you have the RF body(s) the itch to buy RF lenses starts  

I suppose in a way, for me, the news of no 5DV, and so, if true even over the medium term, inevitably the end of the future Canon DSLR and EF lenses, works out great for me as I can buy many more EF lenses on the used market at giveaway prices, and I can get a half price 5DIV to complement my 5DSs. So I say to Canon, thanks Pal


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 21, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> The ef 35mm f/1.4L II works splendidly on the R. So happy I kept this prime when I sold of most of my EF lenses.


That's one I wish I had kept. Just got another 135mm f/2L. Won't ever sell that one again. I'll have to re-purchase all my RF glass again later.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 21, 2020)

Skux said:


> It's a shame, 24fps has become so culturally ingrained that it feels 'wrong' to use other frame rates for film (see: the backlash The Hobbit got). Imagine an Avengers or Star Trek or Fast & Furious film at 60fps, the detail would be incredible.


I'd heard a lot about the Hobbit and that controversy, but it looked great to me.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 21, 2020)

AEWest said:


> Why would anyone pay more for a camera with an obsolete mount and inferior AF system?


EF is hardly obsolete. Canon has made the transition to RF very easy. I have pre-ordered a R5 but will only be using 1 RF lens (RF 70-200mm) and the rest will be EF.
"Inferior AF system"? The 1DXII's AF system is hardly inferior. Certainly superior to the 5Div's AF system (via OVF). The liveview AF system would be the same as the R5 for it to sell well.


----------



## Maru (Jul 21, 2020)

EF wont be obsolate for atleast next 5yrs..not everyone need a new camera and new specs...5dmkIV is more than enough..even same holds true for 6dmkii or 90d


----------



## AEWest (Jul 21, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> EF is hardly obsolete. Canon has made the transition to RF very easy. I have pre-ordered a R5 but will only be using 1 RF lens (RF 70-200mm) and the rest will be EF.
> "Inferior AF system"? The 1DXII's AF system is hardly inferior. Certainly superior to the 5Div's AF system (via OVF). The liveview AF system would be the same as the R5 for it to sell well.


But the better AF only works in Liveview! So basically using a DSLR as a mirrorless camera. In which case why not use a mirrorless camera to begin with?


----------



## croviking (Jul 21, 2020)

My theory is that 5DV is going to happen at some point in a smaller series - for those who need every electron from the battery to be spent efficiently out in the field, far away from a charger. But as many have said, it makes sense for Canon to kill off hope for it until they sell enough R5 cameras to cover the development costs and then some. 

Just because the R&D for Mk V was stopped doesn't mean all data has been destroyed and all progress has been scrapped. They have so much experience with this series that they could announce it in a month when they want it and have production going in another 3 months (and I think I'm being generous here), they just have to decide on what mix of features to put inside.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 21, 2020)

AEWest said:


> But the better AF only works in Liveview! So basically using a DSLR as a mirrorless camera. In which case why not use a mirrorless camera to begin with?


Yes, liveview = mirrorless camera. This shouldn't be a surprise. The only difference is using the screen on the back vs EVF/screen on a mirrorless.
It is the same situation with the current 1DXiii where the AF point coverage is greater than the OVF coverage. There is no 1DX equivalent in mirrorless - not yet. If you want/need the features of the 1DX then it is your hybrid camera for you. 
If people want an OVF and the size of the 5Div and can accept the R5's benefits in liveview then that would be an option. An advantage for this setup could be much longer video times as the heat management would be better with a bigger body.
Pros and cons for both.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 22, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Yes, liveview = mirrorless camera. This shouldn't be a surprise. The only difference is using the screen on the back vs EVF/screen on a mirrorless.
> It is the same situation with the current 1DXiii where the AF point coverage is greater than the OVF coverage. There is no 1DX equivalent in mirrorless - not yet. If you want/need the features of the 1DX then it is your hybrid camera for you.
> If people want an OVF and the size of the 5Div and can accept the R5's benefits in liveview then that would be an option. An advantage for this setup could be much longer video times as the heat management would be better with a bigger body.
> Pros and cons for both.


I saw Jared Polin use a loupe attached to the back of the 1dx3 to take sports photos with the good AF. The way he had to hold the camera looked painful! I definitely wouldn't want that kind of setup in order to get edge to edge AF.


----------



## Maru (Jul 22, 2020)

croviking said:


> My theory is that 5DV is going to happen at some point in a smaller series - for those who need every electron from the battery to be spent efficiently out in the field, far away from a charger. But as many have said, it makes sense for Canon to kill off hope for it until they sell enough R5 cameras to cover the development costs and then some.
> 
> Just because the R&D for Mk V was stopped doesn't mean all data has been destroyed and all progress has been scrapped. They have so much experience with this series that they could announce it in a month when they want it and have production going in another 3 months (and I think I'm being generous here), they just have to decide on what mix of features to put inside.


5d is cheap now and 5dV would have been cheaper than R5 i guess...R is weird and R6 is not in good price because of video features.. thats what I feel


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 22, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> When EVFs really are "just as good" as OVFs, which we've heard every year since they came out. And they're still not.



Whether or not they are just as good depends on what you shoot I guess. I shoot a 5D4 and an EOS-R and can make either work when shooting wildlife.


----------



## Otara (Jul 22, 2020)

I suspect their focus is more on how much business went to companies that have already gone full mirrorless, I doubt their thinking is about 'forcing' anyone to do anything regarding a particular model like the 5DV. If the market was really preferring to stay with OVF's and power saving etc, they should have already been making out like gangbusters.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 22, 2020)

yoms said:


> Uh??? Nonsense.
> To my knowledge, it doesn't happen so often that there's a whole new system...



No, but my point is the same - you can make the 'one more overlap camera' argument for the rest of your life - at some point Canon has to decide to stop supporting competing product lines just for the few (and getting fewer) holdouts that won't cross over to mirrorless.

The EVF argument is lost on me because what I shoot isn't so demanding as to not work for me, so there's that - BUT I don't make my living with my camera so I'm not that hard over as to what I 'need' versus what I 'want'...

I'm just saying that at some point Canon will cut the cord and if they are, indeed, going to continue making the 5D4 then now is as good a time as any.

I don't have a dog in the fight because I'll be going mirrorless from here on out. If they make a 5D5 I'll be absolutely thrilled for those that really want one.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 22, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> Have fun taking pictures of anything that moves quickly/erratically with your mirrorless cameras (GIF is from an R5).
> 
> I'll be over here patiently waiting for a 5DV.
> 
> View attachment 191456




Looks like the R5 tracked it pretty well... Especially considering the target is pretty much out of range for a good image - it definitely doesn't fill the frame.

I shoot BIFs with my EOS-R all the time.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 22, 2020)

mpb001 said:


> Well, I guess I will just keep shooting with my 5DIV. Im not too interested in an R series body. If I decide to try one, I can always rent one first. Im not a fan of battery dependent EVFs, especially when you must make sure the camera is on. Lots of shots to be missed with that.



What kind of shots would you be missing?

This coming from a 5D4 and EOS-R shooter.

When I'm out shooting, my camera is always on. Even in the car as I'm driving down the road, it's on. 

When I see a bird/subject I want to take a picture of, I tap the trigger on my EOS-R as I'm bringing the camera up to my eye - my hand is always on the grip and my trigger finger is always on the button. By the time I get my eye on the EVF the screen is awake and ready to go. When I'm stalking a bird/subject, I tap the button every few seconds to make sure she's not sleeping and ready to go.

No problems. Any shots I miss is because I suck.


----------



## slclick (Jul 22, 2020)

unfocused said:


> $1999 New USA warranty via CPW. A few weeks ago it was under $1800 and probably will be again.


regardless, dirt cheap, HOWEVER, not nearly as good as a Z5


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 22, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> Nyquist is about then information needed to accurately reconstruct a band limited analog signal. And most of those gaming monitors are variable refresh now anyways.



Yeah it's not fully applicable but as an illustration of why high-frequency monitors may provide a better gaming experience - the point was that 120-hz monitors may look better in games but doesn't have to be related to human perception and ability to distinguish 60 vs 120Hz.



davidhfe said:


> Anyways, the human eye can recognize shapes flashed at 1/200th of a second. Stop thinking of the brain/human perception like a computer—it’s way more complicated. A 120fps 6mp EVF is not at human perception limits.



The human eye can also recognise separate photons in the dark, under certain conditions. But recognising short flashes isn't the same as telling 60 vs 120Hz apart - exactly because human perception isn't the same as digital signal processing (although there are many similarities).
Showing a sequence of still frames in computer games isn't the same as showing frames captured in camera.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 22, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> The EVF refresh rate is no guarantee of either throughput or latency. If I had to guess...
> 
> Most EVFs can probably achieve a throughput equal to their advertised refresh in daylight when the camera is not shooting.
> Probably all of them experience a severe drop in throughput in low light.
> Probably no EVFs have a latency equal to their advertised refresh.



That would apply to cases/systems where the signal is arbitrary (4ex coming from different games/applications on PC) and display is a universal device. 
In cameras with EVF, the principles of signal processing are similar, but the whole thing is treated as a single device. When they advertise refresh rate of EVFs at 120fps, users don't expect the actual captures to be taken at 1fps and a latency of 0.5s. For such a device as camera, the latency is processing time, after the captured image is processed, the EVF switches the buffer and displays the result immediately.
In low light the EVF may be better than OVF, the actual frame rate may drop because of longer exposures, but you'll see more detail than when using an OVF. 



dtaylor said:


> Taking a photograph...especially with a mechanical shutter...introduces a very significant 'bubble' into this pipeline. How the system handles this bubble will depend on latency. But if you see an image instead of a black out then it involves using one or more frames outside the normal latency, and using them for multiple refreshes until the system catches up.



Note that when you shoot with mirror and OVF, you also have blackouts. While in EVF it only causes minor stuttering, especially at high shutter speeds.


----------



## Trout Bum (Jul 22, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Ergonomics is one ...and some of us still hope they'll release larger bodies in future - with larger lenses...



I get it about the body, but who wants larger (and heavier) lenses???


----------



## Trout Bum (Jul 22, 2020)

dak3 said:


> I'm sorry that you did not enjoy investing in photography equipment to photograph stupid birds. Since our planet is literally dying, it could be argued that one day, in a not so distant future, people will be craving to experience the beauty, simplicity, calmness, and environment of birds in an attempt to desperately capture that fragile world with photography / videography once again. By then, it will be too late. Given that 200,000 Americans graduate with an MBA every year, with no guarantee of making money or being happy, one could argue that the illusion imposed by society to the individual seeking their dream to be 'successful and happy' via another expensive degree is a deceitful ploy. Happiness is all in the eye of the beholder, and for so many photographers around the world, the personal 'value' of photographing the beauty of wildlife cannot be measured equally with societal value. In the end, to each their own.


I think perhaps Dolina's comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek. I'm guessing as well that the interest in shooting birds reveals an understanding and appreciation for the species, and not necessarily a disinterest in it's future well-being.


----------



## chik0240 (Jul 22, 2020)

The EVF is always a compromise, not to say strain on eye, the drain of battery and heating up of the sensor and processor is inevitable if used continuously compared to a DSLR, that’s physics regardless of technological change.

I agree that for most situations like taking casual shots usually the difference is insignificant but if say shooting events or during vacation at more remote areas where charging can become a problem then DSLR always have an advantage on this side. So let’s hope they keep some higher end DSLR lurking around like the Leica rangefinders for those who wanted or needed it instead of the mirror less ones.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 22, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> That would apply to cases/systems where the signal is arbitrary (4ex coming from different games/applications on PC) and display is a universal device.
> In cameras with EVF, the principles of signal processing are similar, but the whole thing is treated as a single device. When they advertise refresh rate of EVFs at 120fps, users don't expect the actual captures to be taken at 1fps and a latency of 0.5s.



What people expect from advertising has nothing to do with it. It's not a 'single device', it's a pipeline of components with physical limitations. Right off the bat the sensor can't continue to feed a 120 fps pipeline for the EVF while taking full resolution still photos involving a mechanical shutter and a sensor reset. There's going to be a gap.



> In low light the EVF may be better than OVF, the actual frame rate may drop because of longer exposures, but you'll see more detail than when using an OVF.



I can see Orion through a 200mm f/2.8 and the Milky Way through f/1.4-f/2 UWA primes in an OVF. I've never seen an EVF approach that. EVFs are "better" in low light until they're not.



> Note that when you shoot with mirror and OVF, you also have blackouts.



True, but when the mirror goes down what you see is literally what's happening at that moment. (Well...taking the speed of light into account.) I find the "minor stuttering" in EVFs to be quite annoying. 

One of the use cases where I like EVFs is casual photography in tricky lighting because on a 2-3 dial camera you can spin dials until the exposure in the EVF is perfect ETTR. It's a very intuitive way to manually expose a scene. 

One of the use cases I *hate* is fast action precisely because of the stutter. And I've tried the A9 bodies.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 22, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Stills vs. Video. Two different animals. For video you need a viewfinder that allows you to follow the action, but stopping that action is irrelevant. For stills, you need a viewfinder that lets you stop the action. Any lag time between what you see and what is happening in the viewfinder can cause you to miss the peak of action.
> 
> Very simple portrait example: Ballplayer standing in front of the camera tossing the ball in the air and catching it with their glove. With video, you just record the whole sequence. With stills you need to watch to see when the ball hits the peak and snap the shot, any lag or delay and you miss the shot.



True, there is a difference between motion and stills. In stills you are generally trying to get that ONE decisive frame, but today who just snaps that ONE frame. I see the still guys editing their images in the media rooms and it looks almost like video as they scroll through sequences, because they just hold down the shutter during the whole play, essentially shooting their stills cams like its one of our video cameras and more than likely they got "the" frame in their somewhere. And in your example, it's still anticipation, because with an optical VF, "the moment" doesn't happen in the VF, it's obscured by the mirror flipping up and there is a delay between when you trip the shutter and the image is actually captured.

Something that could technically be implemented, especially if manufacturers moved to global shutter, which would easily allow all electronic shutter, they could essentially add pre-roll/pre-record that we have as an option on most of our modern video/cine cameras. They could compensate for the delay in the VF, so that when you hit the trigger, the camera is recording the frame(s) from .X seconds ago. Of course, this would effect battery life.


----------



## mppix (Jul 22, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> That's one I wish I had kept. Just got another 135mm f/2L. Won't ever sell that one again. I'll have to re-purchase all my RF glass again later.


Imagine they make that 85-135mm f2.0 zoom....


----------



## hollybush (Jul 22, 2020)

AEWest said:


> But why would you pay MORE for a camera that could only take EF lenses, has inferior AF, and no IBIS?



Why would someone pay more for a designer chair that lacks carved legs and a recline function?

Why would someone pay more for a modernist house without carpet and gold taps?

Why would someone pay more for a lens with a fixed focal length and no zoom?

Why would someone pay more for a a smaller house in a better area?

In all these cases, the buyers do not value the extra "features". They will pay whatever they have to to get the features they do value.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 22, 2020)

konsolas_captures said:


> I think that unfortunately this rumour is going to be 100% true. I don’t think Canon will make a 5DV, not because there is no need for a 5DV or there is no market for it but for the opposite reason. The 5D line is Canon’s best FF line among pros and enthusiasts. If a 5DV was to be announced then can you imagine the impact it would have to the R5’s and R6’s sales? R5 and R6 seem great cameras, actually they seem more than great but they still cannot compare to a 5D successor. Why? Because people know the 5D line, they know what is capable of, they know how well built they are and how reliable they are. So I think between a 5DV with already owned lenses (from every 5D owner) and an R5 most would choose the 5DV. But Canon doesn’t want to give them the choice, for Canon the only path is mirrorless and the RF mount and that’s why the 5D successor is called R5 and the 6D successor is called R6. The good thing is that no one needs to buy new lenses since the EF lenses work pretty well when adapted to an RF camera, at least to the previous models.


Canon will make a 5Dv if they can make money out of it overall ie not including cannibalisation of other product lines. Some people will pay more than the R5 for specific features not on the R5 eg battery life, OVF, weight/size/ruggedness and perhaps goodies such as longer video times but want a bigger sensor than the 1DXiii. The R5 will meet a lot of pent-up Canon demand for some time and many will switch to RF (including me but for 1 lens) but there will be gaps that perhaps a 5Dv can meet at a lowish cost of a new model next year.
Consumers will buy based on what they perceive are the cost/benefits for them. If people are happy with a 5Div with EF lens then their total cost of ownership will be less to buy a 5Dv at a higher cost than migrate to the R5 for the next few years. They ultimately have the choice but RF will be the long term solution irrespective.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 22, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Not picking on you, but I would like to see this line of reasoning retired once and for all.
> First, no one has any proof this is true.
> Second, there are no real world examples of this. The lowest cost Rebel and the lowest cost M that I can find are exactly the same price.
> Third, even if it were true, the mirror assembly can hardly be a major factor in the total cost of a camera if Canon can make and sell DSLRs for $400.
> ...


Agreed but the mirror box for a rebel is not the same as for 5D/R5. Definitely more expensive to support 500k actuations and 12 fps at a full frame size cf APS-C size. The prism is also bigger for full frame. We clearly aren't talking about $100s though. Reusing component assemblies eg 1DXii AF (for OVF), 5D body and R5 internals would significantly reduce the R&D cost and leadtime to market and should overall increase the quantity sold amortising the R&D to a greater degree.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 22, 2020)

AEWest said:


> But why would you pay MORE for a camera that could only take EF lenses, has inferior AF, and no IBIS?
> 
> The post I quoted said that the new DSLR would cost more than the R5. Even if I wanted a DSLR, the limitations means to me that the camera should cost less than the mirrorless, not more.


Then the R5/6 is the one for you then. If there is a higer cost niche (at appropriate profit margin) for legacy OVF users that are prepared to continue with just EF lens then that should be acceptable for Canon. We will see but I am still on the fence whether the 5Dv is dead or not. If a 5Dv came out at the same time as the R5 with the same goodies but in an identical form factor then I would have got the 5Dv because I have an underwater housing that fits 5Diii/iv/SR. The housing costs as much as the body!


----------



## chik0240 (Jul 22, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> fps





dtaylor said:


> What people expect from advertising has nothing to do with it. It's not a 'single device', it's a pipeline of components with physical limitations. Right off the bat the sensor can't continue to feed a 120 fps pipeline for the EVF while taking full resolution still photos involving a mechanical shutter and a sensor reset. There's going to be a gap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Actually both are the reason I prefer a 5D V instead of a R5, yes the R5 don't need focus adjustment and records great movie plus better wide angle lens, but it can do the trickery lighting part by LV and for most of the time I got the battery saving OVF, lens wise yes the RF opens up a lot of great lens designs, but if adapted to the weight of the old system, the EF lenses are actually good enough to be unnoticeable, say in my lens collection I still use the decade old 70-200 F4L IS and 16-35 F2.8 L II with absolutely no desire to upgrade to the later version. yes in pixel peeping the sharpness might fall a bit but that's not perceivable for 99% of cases and $$$ in my account is very perceivable. so the RF lens with their even more monstrous size pose a major drag for upgrading.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 22, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> What people expect from advertising has nothing to do with it. It's not a 'single device', it's a pipeline of components with physical limitations. Right off the bat the sensor can't continue to feed a 120 fps pipeline for the EVF while taking full resolution still photos involving a mechanical shutter and a sensor reset. There's going to be a gap.



From the user's perspective, it's a single device, unlike 4ex desktop PC + monitor. So with EVFs, as a user I don't expect hidden latency behind the claimed 60 or 120 Hz refresh rates. Moreover, technically the R5/R6 should be able to provide a minimal latency - that is, display the captured image at the nearest frame update in the EVF, thus producing the minimal possible latency.

Blackout/freeze in the EVF shouldn't be longer than exposure time + readout + time till the nearest EVF update. So with short exposures it should be negligible. With DSLR, the optical blackout also includes time to move the mirror in and out.

I didn't use Sony A9II myself, but reviews/videos show literally no noticeable stuttering at 20 fps shooting (although it's fully electronic shutter). I expect to see the same in the R5/R6.


----------



## Otara (Jul 22, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Then the R5/6 is the one for you then. If there is a higer cost niche (at appropriate profit margin) for legacy OVF users that are prepared to continue with just EF lens then that should be acceptable for Canon. We will see but I am still on the fence whether the 5Dv is dead or not. If a 5Dv came out at the same time as the R5 with the same goodies but in an identical form factor then I would have got the 5Dv because I have an underwater housing that fits 5Diii/iv/SR. The housing costs as much as the body!



You've had better luck than me then, every new camera Ive bought has needed a new housing, other than the 40D/50D. Id love to get a housing for the R5, but I suspect the Nauticam version will make the camera look cheap.


----------



## Fischer (Jul 22, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I went shooting the other day with the EOS R and the 5DSR. Using the 5DSR again after adapting to mirrorless was like going back to the stone age. I know there are plenty of people who love DSLRs, but no-way I'd ever go back to using one as my primary camera again.


Even if its the opposite for myself I fully agree that mirrorless cameras have inherent advantages that makes taking the pictures we want easier.

Having seen the very convincing specs and gleaming the lttle info so far from the R5 pre-reviews - I am looking very much forward to the release of the high MPIX R .


----------



## drama (Jul 22, 2020)

Respinder said:


> I could also see Canon still release a 5DS Mark II at some point in the future.



Agree. I think the short term plan is to push consumers to the R system. Make it the new norm. Then it will be time to put out a couple of new EF bodies that maybe have different numberings, maybe use sensors that appeared in the R line first, that kind of thing. So they will still support, but the innovation will come in the R system.


----------



## mpb001 (Jul 22, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> What kind of shots would you be missing?
> 
> This coming from a 5D4 and EOS-R shooter.
> 
> ...


So your R camera is on all of the time? Does that consume battery power? How long does it take for the EVF to wakeup?


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 22, 2020)

Another small advantage of mirrorless. I slapped the 50mm f/1.2L EF on my EOS R a couple of nights ago and went out here in London to see the comet. Impossible to see with the naked eye, but using the EOS R and 50mm as a night vision device I could see the comet perfectly!


----------



## keetyUK (Jul 22, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Jumping from 24 to 60 is quite noticeable in movies. From 60 to 120 - not really.



For anything fast moving (panning for instance) its incredibly noticeable. If your static then yeah, not so much so.

Also, don't forget there's a massive difference between sitting 5 feet away from a 55" TV or what not and having your eye pressed up against a tiny viewfinder less than 1" from your eye. Using a VR headset the faster refresh rate the smoother less nauseous the experience.


----------



## slclick (Jul 22, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> True, there is a difference between motion and stills. In stills you are generally trying to get that ONE decisive frame, but today who just snaps that ONE frame. I see the still guys editing their images in the media rooms and it looks almost like video as they scroll through sequences, because they just hold down the shutter during the whole play, essentially shooting their stills cams like its one of our video cameras and more than likely they got "the" frame in their somewhere. And in your example, it's still anticipation, because with an optical VF, "the moment" doesn't happen in the VF, it's obscured by the mirror flipping up and there is a delay between when you trip the shutter and the image is actually captured.
> 
> Something that could technically be implemented, especially if manufacturers moved to global shutter, which would easily allow all electronic shutter, they could essentially add pre-roll/pre-record that we have as an option on most of our modern video/cine cameras. They could compensate for the delay in the VF, so that when you hit the trigger, the camera is recording the frame(s) from .X seconds ago. Of course, this would effect battery life.


On occasion, I snap that one frame. I was taught early on, mostly because of film to not spray and pray. But kids, what can you do?


----------



## masterpix (Jul 22, 2020)

chik0240 said:


> actually seeing the light than the monitor is a huge deal to eye health, believe me looking at a monitor for hours with high concentration will make your glasses thick quick


Never thought about it. Thanks! I need then to save for the 1Dx now..


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 22, 2020)

keetyUK said:


> For anything fast moving (panning for instance) its incredibly noticeable. If your static then yeah, not so much so.
> 
> Also, don't forget there's a massive difference between sitting 5 feet away from a 55" TV or what not and having your eye pressed up against a tiny viewfinder less than 1" from your eye. Using a VR headset the faster refresh rate the smoother less nauseous the experience.



VR headset and games in general aren't the same as frames captured on a camera sensor. In games, the actual FPS is variable and monitor acts as a fixed-frequency sampler from a variable-rate feed, so higher refresh rates in general provide smoother experience. Also an important thing is, in games each frame is 'sharp' and doesn't have a motion blur as if they were captured at a very high shutter speed (unless special effects applied during rendering). In a video stream very short exposures also cause unpleasant effect, that's why optimal video exposure is 1/2 of frame duration.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 22, 2020)

mpb001 said:


> So your R camera is on all of the time? Does that consume battery power? How long does it take for the EVF to wakeup?



For me that has never been an issue. My EOS-R is gripped and I've always been fine in terms of battery life. Of course this is in reference to how I go out and take pictures and someone else might have a completely different outcome.

I shoot wildlife almost exclusively. I have a little area in the back of my Jeep behind the driver's seat set up to carry my gear - I carry a backpack full of lenses and batteries and stuff like that, and I have two positions where two cameras can be carried securely but in such a way that if I need to I can pull over, pop open the door and grab whichever camera I want. I live on an Island so a typical day out shooting means driving the shore roads from favorite spot to favorite spot looking for opportunities.

As soon as I grab the R I tap the trigger to wake her up. By the time I get the camera to my eye she is awake. For me, there is no wake up lag. If someone waits until they have the camera to their eye to tap the trigger then they will have a different result. Ditto tapping the trigger as I stalk.

If there is any extra battery consumed by doing it this way it isn't something I've seen or been impacted by over the course of a day out shooting. If I did, I have extra batteries and a swap only takes a couple of minutes.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jul 22, 2020)

There are still some things that DSLRs do better for certain use cases... but the real issue is this: As the market slowly moves towards MILCs, a large part of that driven by a new generation of shooters that don't know much about OVFs or DSLRs, DSLRs will slowly become more of a niche. You may still be able to buy a DSLR down the road, but it will be expensive and not as well equipped as the equivalent MILC. It almost like the video argument among still shooters. People like myself used to be in such a small minority, but clearly this market is growing enough to the point that Canon quite loudly pushed the video specs of the R5/R6 above its stills specs. Some stills only shooters may not like it, but Canon's done their research and the product is end result of that.

If we talk about cars for example, I still like a good stick shift car, but these days it is actually hard to find vehicles that are still offered in manual transmission. Personally, it is more about the control and feel than performance because a modern ZF 8 speed shifts faster and is more consistent than any manual driver and it can even displace some DCTs that are prone to its own issues. So when it came time for car shopping, and I wanted new, I had to go with an automatic.. But the automatic also lets the vehicle gain a ton of driver assist tech which is handy in day to day use. Things like auto-follow stop and go and auto parallel space finder and parking are so handy and simply couldn't be done with a manual.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 22, 2020)

jayphotoworks said:


> If we talk about cars for example, I still like a good stick shift car, but these days it is actually hard to find vehicles that are still offered in manual transmission.



I understand that a manual transmission is now a good theft deterrent. Many car thieves don't know how to drive them, today.


----------



## Joules (Jul 22, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Jumping from 24 to 60 is quite noticeable in movies. From 60 to 120 - not really.


I can only speak from personal experience with my 144 Hz g-sync Gaming monitor. And that experience is that there is a gigantic difference, especially in perceived motion blur. The monitor has a 165 Hz mode as well, and in that case I couldn't make out the difference in terms of how it feels. But higher refresh rates are not just about perception, but extend to the subconscious reaction as well.

Here's a well done video about it, if you don't want to go by subjective opinions only:






Sure, tracking action is different from gaming with a mouse in that it requires less precision but involves a greater part of the body. But unless you are only talking about movies, I would not support any claims about high refresh rates being barely noticeable.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jul 22, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I understand that a manual transmission is now a good theft deterrent. Many car thieves don't know how to drive them, today.



Yes, there has been some reports over the last few years. I remember one of them where a carjacking attempt happened and the thieves couldn't get the car going and bailed on foot. They were probably wondering why the car kept stalling .. but even driving a manual today isn't the same experience anymore because newer manuals have auto-brake-hold which makes getting off from a standstill on an incline so much easier.


----------



## slclick (Jul 22, 2020)

jayphotoworks said:


> There are still some things that DSLRs do better for certain use cases... but the real issue is this: As the market slowly moves towards MILCs, a large part of that driven by a new generation of shooters that don't know much about OVFs or DSLRs, DSLRs will slowly become more of a niche. You may still be able to buy a DSLR down the road, but it will be expensive and not as well equipped as the equivalent MILC. It almost like the video argument among still shooters. People like myself used to be in such a small minority, but clearly this market is growing enough to the point that Canon quite loudly pushed the video specs of the R5/R6 above its stills specs. Some stills only shooters may not like it, but Canon's done their research and the product is end result of that.
> 
> If we talk about cars for example, I still like a good stick shift car, but these days it is actually hard to find vehicles that are still offered in manual transmission. Personally, it is more about the control and feel than performance because a modern ZF 8 speed shifts faster and is more consistent than any manual driver and it can even displace some DCTs that are prone to its own issues. So when it came time for car shopping, and I wanted new, I had to go with an automatic.. But the automatic also lets the vehicle gain a ton of driver assist tech which is handy in day to day use. Things like auto-follow stop and go and auto parallel space finder and parking are so handy and simply couldn't be done with a manual.


I agree with your first part and Nikon's commitment to film bodies past the digital revolution shows just that. It will exist but it will be high end, very expensive and not for everyone. Kind of sad.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 22, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> From the user's perspective, it's a single device, unlike 4ex desktop PC + monitor. So with EVFs, as a user I don't expect hidden latency behind the claimed 60 or 120 Hz refresh rates.



You seem to be trying to say that X can't be true because people don't expect X. But physical reality doesn't care about what you expect.



> Moreover, technically the R5/R6 should be able to provide a minimal latency - that is, display the captured image at the nearest frame update in the EVF, thus producing the minimal possible latency.



I can just about guarantee you latency is longer than frame refresh. It may or may not be noticeable while you're not shooting stills depending on the latency and on subject/camera movement. But it's quite relevant when the system falls behind due to bubbles introduced while capturing still frames.



> Blackout/freeze in the EVF shouldn't be longer than exposure time + readout + time till the nearest EVF update.



The system has to reset the sensor, expose, readout, process, and deliver a frame to the display buffer. Kinda doubt that's happening in 8.3 ms. Once again: latency and throughput are separate things, and after a still shot there is a bubble in the pipeline.

And even if latency was 1 ms, that bubble would still exist. The image would just be closer to reality once the bubble was out. The only way around this is e-shutter + a sensor that can readout at 120 fps with interspersed full resolution frames at the advertised stills rate (say 20 fps) + a display pipeline that can handle 100 EVF + 20 full readouts every second. Latency could still be greater than 8.3 ms, but you would never introduce bubbles into the pipeline, which is most of what people are noticing. Only problem with this is that most people most of the time are not going to use e-shutter due to rolling shutter effects.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

mppix said:


> I don't get this comment. First, this was more how Canon introduced the EF mount, less about the technical details. Second, you can adapt FD lenses in general.



Were you around back then? This is nothing like the way Canon introduced the EF system and more or less said, "Take it or leave it."

FD lenses are in no way "fully compatible" with the EF mount in any shape or fashion the way EF lenses are *seamlessly* compatible with the RF (and EF-M) mount(s). 

The lens and camera could not communicate aperture information at all. Stop down metering was problematic and it was simpler to just use an external light meter in most shooting scenarios.

The rare adapter, which Canon only made available via CPS, introduced additional glass that reduced image quality and acted as a 1.1X teleconverter. Don't forget to compensate for the reduced f-number when manually setting the aperture on the lens. All values on the aperture ring had to be converted to the slightly higher f-number each was as a result of the TC.

The rare adapter, which could only be bought directly from Canon via CPS, could only be used on specific telephoto lenses. There was no "official" way to adapt any other FD lenses to EOS bodies.


----------



## Fischer (Jul 22, 2020)

We will see if this rumour sticks or not. However, when Canon went with the EOS mount they made a quick, hard cut-off leaving everyone who did not move across behind while Nikon made their system "legacy-proof." If this is way Canon wanta to go again it makes perfect sense that Canon has released two great EF to RF adapters. People can keep their lens investment that lasts very long, while Canon still get a rapid transition of their Camera production and development from EOS to R-models allowing them to focus on a single line of operation while trying to make the RF line of lenses different than the EF.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Canon's line up for the next few years might be:
> 
> 
> Two full frame DSLRs -- 1Dx III and the new amalgamation;
> ...



Canon wants to get out of the business of mixing an affordable, compact system with only a few 61mm diameter lenses aimed at consumers who want nothing more than an affordable, compact camera with a few affordable, compact lenses with a different and much broader ranging system of bodies and lenses that are marketed toward and appeal to enthusiast photographers and professional photographers.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

photo212 said:


> My 5D Mk III is not going anywhere, anytime soon. I still have two 5D Mk II as backups - one with 300K shutter activations.
> 
> I didn't jump to the 5D Mk IV, as it just wasn't the big step I wanted. I started getting interested in the 1D X Mk II. Real interested. Then the 1D X Mk III arrived, but with only one option for memory cards. Sort of made me think the 1D X Mk II was the camera upgrade for me. I suspect Canon wants more 5D Mk X users to consider the 1D X line.
> 
> I gotta think total budget, as I'll need a new desktop computer in the upgrade.



For myself, who spends the majority of shooting time under flickering artificial lighting at small college and high school level (or below) stadiums/ball fields and gymnasiums, the difference between the 5D Mark III, which did not offer flicker reduction, and the 5D Mark IV, which did, was as revolutionary as when the 7D Mark II introduced it in 2014.

Prior to the release of the 7D Mark II I had sworn off on ever buying another APS-C camera body. The 7D was that disappointing to me.

Flicker reduction totally changed that. 

In other areas as well the 7D Mark II was everything I had expected the 7D should have been but was not. It wasn't perfect. (No camera is, no matter what the marketing departments say when they introduce a new model that miraculously solves every photographic problem known to man in the same way the last new model did, at least the last one did until the new model came out and suddenly the older model had all kinds of shortcomings that the newer model fixes.) But it ticked off a lot of the boxes that the 7D should have but didn't.

Unfortunately, due to budget constraints related to family health issues and the associated financial considerations, I was not able to include a 5D Mark IV in my tool set until 2019. Even apart from flicker reduction, it was a more significant upgrade from the 5D Mark III than the press and reviewers had implied, at least for the kinds of still imaging I do. (Video performance is not a consideration for me when comparing stills cameras.)


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

Otara said:


> Not talking about tracking, just pure image quality from an EF lens on the R5. There are several videos with raptor tracking that look fairly impressive, but they're probably with RF lenses.



Until the 100-500/4.5-7.1, 800/11, and 600/11 are actually out in the wild, anything shot at more than 240mm was not RF. Yes, a handful of reviewers have had the new f/11 lenses for a few days, and Canon Ambassadors had them for a while a little earlier, but most YouTubers are still waiting on them.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

unfocused said:


> If there is an R1, and if it is intended to replace the 1DX, then it should be on a four-year cycle and hence the 2024 Olympics. Maybe they will launch it early and have it ready for the 2022 Winter Olympics, but 2021 seems hopelessly optimistic at this point.



I think Canon's original plan was to introduce an R1 just in time for the 2022 Winter Games, so it would probably have been rolled out in late 2021. 

The disruption caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has probably pushed it back to the 2024 Summer Games.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 22, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Canon wants to get out of the business of mixing an affordable, compact system with only a few 61mm diameter lenses aimed at consumers who want nothing more than an affordable, compact camera with a few affordable, compact lenses with a different and much broader ranging system of bodies and lenses that are marketed toward and appeal to enthusiast photographers and professional photographers.


Well, neither one of us is going to convince the other. We will just have to wait and see. I'd prefer an R7 to an M7, but I'm not optimistic that will be the case. Hoping that in 2021 we will find out who is right and we don't have to wait until 2022. Or, worse yet, that we never find out because Canon never makes either one.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> In fairness, some of those 5D V sales would be to people also buying the R5. I don't know if that would be me, but only because I'm waiting to see Canon's rumored 83mp monster. I've said before that if Canon released a new, higher resolution sensor in DSLR and mirrorless formats I would likely end up with one of each.



Even those who might buy both are only increasing the sales count by one 5D Mark V. *They'll almost certainly buy an R5 whether or not the 5D Mark V is ever made.* 

Introducing a 5D Mark V will not cause very many folks, if any, that would otherwise not buy an R5 to buy an R5. On the other hand, there would have been a significant number of folks who might buy a 5 Mark V _instead of_ an R5.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> When EVFs really are "just as good" as OVFs, which we've heard every year since they came out. And they're still not.



We've also been hearing, "The DSLR is dead, long live mirrorless!" since around 2012.

We're certainly 8 years closer to the death of the DSLR now in 2020 than we were in 2012, but reports of the final demise of the DSLR as a recent occurrence - to paraphrase Mark Twain - "... seem to be grossly exaggerated."


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

Sirkings said:


> If im forced to change to the R line (im 5D user from MK I to MKIV)is the adaptor lens good enough to work with the EF lens with this new body ? im very concern about this. Can anyone enlighten on this?



There's no "lens" in the adapter. None. It's a hollow tube with electronic connections between the body and lens. It's the proper thickness to space an EF lens 44mm in front of the camera's sensor, which is 24mm in front of the camera's mount flange. That's it.

There have been near countless reports posted everywhere on the interwebs saying that EF lenses are at least as good on RF bodies as they were on comparable EF bodies. They give up nothing when adapted to RF bodies that they could do on EF bodies.

Obviously, the same lens will not focus as fast on an RP as it would on a 1D X, but that same lens would not focus as fast on an EF Rebel as it would focus on a 1D X, either.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

slclick said:


> $1877 USD refurbed!



$1,999 USD new with rebates from authorized Canon U.S.A. dealers for several weeks up until the end of June! I'm sure we'll see that again in the future.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

unfocused said:


> $1999 New USA warranty via CPW. A few weeks ago it was under $1800 and probably will be again.



Until the end of the most recently expired rebates, you didn't even need to use CPW to get a 5D Mark IV for $1,999+tax. Every authorized Canon dealer in the U.S. had it at that price, usually with a few bonus goodies such as an extra (third party) battery, memory card, or camera bag.

Refurb and New warranty in the U.S. are the same at one year now. Canon USA upped the warranty on refurb lenses and cameras from 90 days to 1-year several years ago.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> That's one I wish I had kept. Just got another 135mm f/2L. Won't ever sell that one again. I'll have to re-purchase all my RF glass again later.



I'm truly sorry you had to sell your RF lenses. That stinks.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

AEWest said:


> But the better AF only works in Liveview! So basically using a DSLR as a mirrorless camera. In which case why not use a mirrorless camera to begin with?



The EOS 1D X Mark III has a totally new type of AF sensor for the OVF. It's basically a miniature CMOS sensor, not a line sensor as has been the case with every single previous EOS DSLR for the past thirty-three years. 

The AF performance of the 1D X Mark III is better than any DSLR ever produced, and damn close to the performance when using the main imaging sensor via Live View. Just ask those who are shooting with it how revolutionary the OVF based AF system of the 1D X Mark III is compared to the 1D X Mark II or any other DSLR.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

AEWest said:


> I saw Jared Polin use a loupe attached to the back of the 1dx3 to take sports photos with the good AF. The way he had to hold the camera looked painful! I definitely wouldn't want that kind of setup in order to get edge to edge AF.



He explained in that video that he did that in order to be able to simultaneously record what he saw for the video you watched. There's no way to look through the optical VF and at the same time record what one sees in the OVF for a YouTube video.

He also did it to compare the OVF based AF to the LV based AF, as well as to get a feel for what the R5 AF might be like. He did not do it because the OVF based AF was not "good enough".


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 22, 2020)

Otara said:


> You've had better luck than me then, every new camera Ive bought has needed a new housing, other than the 40D/50D. Id love to get a housing for the R5, but I suspect the Nauticam version will make the camera look cheap.


I am sure that Nauticam will require a new housing at the normal Nauticam pricing! 
I use Ikelite. They don't have complete coverage of all buttons but there is nothing that I can't work around. The Ikelite housings are also larger and has more air around it so buoyancy is more tricky. I am not making money from underwater photography so the massive price difference to Nauticam can't be justified for me.
A new Ikelite housing for sure with the R5 though... I can't imagine needing to upgrade it for a very long time 
It will be my first time to sell my 5Dx housing second hand. Not sure how well they hold their value especially in a small market like Australia.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> I can see Orion through a 200mm f/2.8 and the Milky Way through f/1.4-f/2 UWA primes in an OVF. I've never seen an EVF approach that. EVFs are "better" in low light until they're not.



^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^

When properly adapted to the dark, my eyes can see dimmer astronomical objects via the OVF long after an EVF shows nothing but the noise floor. Not to mention that one glance in the EVF ruins that dark adaptation that took 15+ minutes to acquire.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 22, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I understand that a manual transmission is now a good theft deterrent. Many car thieves don't know how to drive them, today.


----------



## slclick (Jul 23, 2020)

Fischer said:


> We will see if this rumour sticks or not. However, when Canon went with the EOS mount they made a quick, hard cut-off leaving everyone who did not move across behind while Nikon made their system "legacy-proof." If this is way Canon wanta to go again it makes perfect sense that Canon has released two great EF to RF adapters. People can keep their lens investment that lasts very long, while Canon still get a rapid transition of their Camera production and development from EOS to R-models allowing them to focus on a single line of operation while trying to make the RF line of lenses different than the EF.


That was revolutionary, this is evolutionary.


----------



## slclick (Jul 23, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Well, neither one of us is going to convince the other. We will just have to wait and see. I'd prefer an R7 to an M7, but I'm not optimistic that will be the case. Hoping that in 2021 we will find out who is right and we don't have to wait until 2022. Or, worse yet, that we never find out because Canon never makes either one.


An M7 would never have the toughness, speed, cards, grip or heft required for many 7D users and shooting styles. IDK why anyone is talking the M system with regards to a birding and sports body.My M5 was nice enough but it was a snapshot machine. Defending and debating a mythical potential future M bodyto be used for serious field work is a joke.


----------



## Otara (Jul 23, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I am sure that Nauticam will require a new housing at the normal Nauticam pricing!
> I use Ikelite. They don't have complete coverage of all buttons but there is nothing that I can't work around. The Ikelite housings are also larger and has more air around it so buoyancy is more tricky. I am not making money from underwater photography so the massive price difference to Nauticam can't be justified for me.
> A new Ikelite housing for sure with the R5 though... it will be my first time to sell a housing second hand. Not sure how well they hold their value especially in a small market like Australia.



I was Ikelite before, I lost my first 7D due to being the old dual port lock system so bought Nauticam (amongst other reasons) and of course after years of swearing two was all that was needed, they put 4 on the next Ikelite model. 

I probably wont get a housing for the R5, watching the port fill with water with that would probably end up with me on life support.


----------



## Otara (Jul 23, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Until the 100-500/4.5-7.1, 800/11, and 600/11 are actually out in the wild, anything shot at more than 240mm was not RF. Yes, a handful of reviewers have had the new f/11 tles for a few days, and Canon Ambassadors had them for a while a little earlier, but most YouTubers are still waiting on them.



Theres the 100-500mm video with BIF and Lehman, he supposedly isnt one according to a whole thread arguing over it on DPreview, but for all practical purposes yeah.


----------



## Otara (Jul 23, 2020)

slclick said:


> An M7 would never have the toughness, speed, cards, grip or heft required for many 7D users and shooting styles. IDK why anyone is talking the M system with regards to a birding and sports body.My M5 was nice enough but it was a snapshot machine. Defending and debating a mythical potential future M bodyto be used for serious field work is a joke.



I would say theres a substantial potential market for lightweight BIF setups, even if its not 'serious'. Olympus has been pretty popular in that area, so its not that bizarre to expect Canon to take a look at that area with something like an M7, particularly given the 600/800 releases as a nod in that direction.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 23, 2020)

Otara said:


> I was Ikelite before, I lost my first 7D due to being the old dual port lock system so bought Nauticam (amongst other reasons) and of course after years of swearing two was all that was needed, they put 4 on the next Ikelite model.
> 
> I probably wont get a housing for the R5, watching the port fill with water with that would probably end up with me on life support.


Yeah, the old design wasn't good (2/4 lock) but the new DL version with the vacuum pump is awesome. Been out for at least 5 years now and very simple to use. I have insurance so no worries from that perspective.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 23, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> You seem to be trying to say that X can't be true because people don't expect X. But physical reality doesn't care about what you expect.



No, it can't be X because 120Hz refresh rate is in the official Canon specs (or Sony A9II specs). And I don't think it's a misleading figure because the cameras can do it with minimal delay.



dtaylor said:


> I can just about guarantee you latency is longer than frame refresh. It may or may not be noticeable while you're not shooting stills depending on the latency and on subject/camera movement. But it's quite relevant when the system falls behind due to bubbles introduced while capturing still frames.



As in the beginning of this argument, I can almost guarantee the average delay between capturing and displaying will be less than 1/120s, and average delay between physical event and displaying it will be less than 1/120 + the exposure time.
'Latency' in this system, as above, is simply the processing time plus readout, and it physically can't be longer than the refresh rate (with caveats already discussed in this thread).



dtaylor said:


> The system has to reset the sensor, expose, readout, process, and deliver a frame to the display buffer. Kinda doubt that's happening in 8.3 ms. Once again: latency and throughput are separate things, and after a still shot there is a bubble in the pipeline.



This system most likely does processing during exposure, so we have 8.3ms to just read it out and process/convert into the EVF buffer. It's more than enough for a 5mp image. 'Delivering a frame to the display buffer' is not a thing, the whole processing is done right in the EVF buffer so it's ready right after processing is done. Readout is most likely done in 8bit with skipping, so must be very fast.



dtaylor said:


> And even if latency was 1 ms, that bubble would still exist. The image would just be closer to reality once the bubble was out. The only way around this is e-shutter + a sensor that can readout at 120 fps with interspersed full resolution frames at the advertised stills rate (say 20 fps)



Not sure what bubble you're referring to. During continuous shooting, the EVF will obviously stutter but still able to display the latest captured image after each exposure. Shooting with curtain will likely cause heavier hiccups.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 23, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> No, it can't be X because 120Hz refresh rate is in the official Canon specs (or Sony A9II specs).



At best this implies that throughput is 120 fps, and at worst that the EVF refresh alone is 120 fps. (And in fact it's probably best and worst for the same camera depending on light levels.) But either way this advertised figure guarantees nothing about latency and nothing about the size (time) of the bubbles that are introduced by still capture.



> And I don't think it's a misleading figure because the cameras can do it with minimal delay.



And that's a naked assertion which goes against observation. People are telling you they can see EVFs fall behind during burst shooting. We'll see how the R5/R6 hold up, but this has long been a problem with mirrorless.



> 'Latency' in this system, as above, is simply the processing time plus readout, and it physically can't be longer than the refresh rate...



It most certainly can. The path from exposure to EVF is a pipeline with discrete steps. No single step can be longer than 1/120th (assuming a true 120 fps in sufficient light), but the total path can theoretically be any length of time. That's the difference between throughput and latency.



> 'Delivering a frame to the display buffer' is not a thing, the whole processing is done right in the EVF buffer so it's ready right after processing is done.



It would be detrimental to performance, and difficult to code, if the processor had to interleave reads/writes with display reads. It's far easier to synchronize a single write of a completed frame against the display's 120 Hz read cycle. That EVF has its own discrete display buffer. There's no way DIGIC X is contending with the EVF for access to memory, it would just slaughter performance/efficiency.



> Not sure what bubble you're referring to.



During the time it takes to readout a full resolution still frame and reset the sensor, no data is being fed to the EVF pipeline.



> During continuous shooting, the EVF will obviously stutter but still able to display the latest captured image after each exposure.



Again, some cameras observably fall further behind during burst shooting. But even if the R5/R6 do not fall further behind, 1/20th or 1/12th + latency...which could be longer when processing a full resolution readout to the EVF...can be an eternity for some action sequences.

At the end of the day all that matters is the photographer's experience and performance. There's stutter on the highest end mirrorless bodies. Can you work around it and track any way? Sure. Is OVF blackout less disruptive? A lot of people think so.


----------



## geffy (Jul 23, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> This is the main reason why I absolutely hate DXO's "perceptual megapixels" nonsense.
> 
> Resolution does not work this way. Components do not "out resolve" and cap each other in this manner. System resolution is always lower than the weakest component, but improving the strongest component will still improve the final result. An R5 with a cheap 1990s consumer zoom will still produce a better image than, say, an R6 with the same lens.
> 
> ...


if you ever put ef lenses on a smaller sensor you will see my point, a 24mp small sensor is about the same as an r5 once scaled up, my experience of older lenses on bigger sensors tell me they are the bottleneck of the system why have an 18mp image on a 45 mp camera, that is why new lenses are needed for these new cameras


----------



## slclick (Jul 23, 2020)

Otara said:


> I would say theres a substantial potential market for lightweight BIF setups, even if its not 'serious'. Olympus has been pretty popular in that area, so its not that bizarre to expect Canon to take a look at that area with something like an M7, particularly given the 600/800 releases as a nod in that direction.


I think you're poking fun at the word serious. I wasn't using it as in a photographers mindset or ego yet as in use for harsh environments, rough and tumble and what not. Also, shutter count and sealing. We all don't live or travel to safaris or Antarctica but some of us do live, work and play in a wide range of climates and shooting climes. I shoot from -20 to 105 F, from snow and ice, to heat, dust and mud. I am inclined to purchase camera bodies that take a good licking. The M is not and imho, will not ever fall into that category.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 23, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> And that's a naked assertion which goes against observation. People are telling you they can see EVFs fall behind during burst shooting. We'll see how the R5/R6 hold up, but this has long been a problem with mirrorless.



Sony A9II EVF at 120Hz is reported to be very good. I didn't try it myself, but the R5/R6 have even faster readout and CPU and also have 120Hz EVFs.



dtaylor said:


> It most certainly can. The path from exposure to EVF is a pipeline with discrete steps. No single step can be longer than 1/120th (assuming a true 120 fps in sufficient light), but the total path can theoretically be any length of time. That's the difference between throughput and latency.



No it doesn't work like that because it's meaningless, and also requires multithreading. If you have 2 frames being processed at the same time, you need 2 threads, 3 frames - 3 threads etc. It simply doesn't work like that.
With a single thread, the processing MUST be less than 1/120s, it's simple math. You can introduce additional buffers and artificial/unnecessary latency, but why? Just because it's Canon with its cripple hammer?

What heppens in reality, the whole pipeline after the capture is basically readout plus applying some filters (de-mosaicing + current image style), after which it's basically ready for EVF right away. There's no point in breaking it down into many steps separated in time.



dtaylor said:


> It would be detrimental to performance, and difficult to code, if the processor had to interleave reads/writes with display reads. It's far easier to synchronize a single write of a completed frame against the display's 120 Hz read cycle. That EVF has its own discrete display buffer. There's no way DIGIC X is contending with the EVF for access to memory, it would just slaughter performance/efficiency.



Of course it's shared memory/direct memory access by EVF. They do processing in a buffer and the EVF switches to the buffer right away, there's no additional copying/writing anywhere. Basically it takes two alternating buffers.
There's another buffer with overlay (settings/histogram) etc., also used directly by the EVF module, but it takes much less time to maintain.



dtaylor said:


> At the end of the day all that matters is the photographer's experience and performance. There's stutter on the highest end mirrorless bodies. Can you work around it and track any way? Sure. Is OVF blackout less disruptive? A lot of people think so.



I'm more concerned about how the EVF affects the eyes, I've never used EVFs for long periods of time, but even short periods cause discomfort to me. But I'm shooting more and more landscapes and less and less action, especially this year, so I'll mostly be using the LCD screen.

Additional delays during continuous shooting - again the A9II is said to be very good at it, I expect the R5 to be on par. Time will tell.


----------



## bbb34 (Jul 23, 2020)

Until a couple of weeks ago I thought that DSLR technology will become obsolescent when EVF becomes more attractive than OVF; when the added value of EVF outweighs the optical superiority of the OVF.

The appearance of the R5 changed my mind. It is the auto focus technology that is plundering the territory of the DSLR, not the view finder. 

I would like to see a 5DV, but I wouldn't buy it if its auto focus performs much better in live view mode. It is better to have a decent EVF that you can always use, than a great OVF that you don't use.


----------



## Otara (Jul 23, 2020)

slclick said:


> I think you're poking fun at the word serious. I wasn't using it as in a photographers mindset or ego yet as in use for harsh environments, rough and tumble and what not. Also, shutter count and sealing. We all don't live or travel to safaris or Antarctica but some of us do live, work and play in a wide range of climates and shooting climes. I shoot from -20 to 105 F, from snow and ice, to heat, dust and mud. I am inclined to purchase camera bodies that take a good licking. The M is not and imho, will not ever fall into that category.



More poking fun at the idea there's one definition for 'serious' BIF and Sports. The 7D II came out with many desirable features, and what particular features would be a priority are going to differ widely between people. 

Great AF, frame rate and image quality in a smaller package that isnt too costly would be a very desirable thing for many, with weather sealing and the like being less of a priority. The M6 II seemed to be a nod in that direction, so a further move towards that set of features is not unlikely, even if it wouldnt fit your personal needs.


----------



## slclick (Jul 23, 2020)

Otara said:


> More poking fun at the idea there's one definition for 'serious' BIF and Sports. The 7D II came out with many desirable features, and what particular features would be a priority are going to differ widely between people.
> 
> Great AF, frame rate and image quality in a smaller package that isnt too costly would be a very desirable thing for many, with weather sealing and the like being less of a priority. The M6 II seemed to be a nod in that direction, so a further move towards that set of features is not unlikely, even if it wouldnt fit your personal needs.



I just cannot put my faith in its dependability, its build. It feels like a toy to me. And even though I don't feel a as if you read or maybe understood more than the first few words of what I wrote, I do agree with your last sentiment, it's not for me. Between owning a iphone and a FF dslr with a variety of glass, the M family isn't needed. Believe me,I gave it the old college try, it failed just like my M43 experiment a few years back as well. It always went back to one thing, build.These things won't survive the shortest drop or remain unscathed while being bumped in the field. The shit my 7D and 5D cameras have been though, it really impresses me.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 23, 2020)

slclick said:


> An M7 would never have the toughness, speed, cards, grip or heft required for many 7D users and shooting styles. IDK why anyone is talking the M system with regards to a birding and sports body.My M5 was nice enough but it was a snapshot machine. Defending and debating a mythical potential future M bodyto be used for serious field work is a joke.


I guess I don't understand this line of reasoning. To me, that's like saying that Canon couldn't possibly have made a 7D because the Rebels were not big enough or robust enough. The decision will be driven by the sensor size and the lens mount. The M mount is the mount Canon made for APS-C sensors in mirrorless cameras. Canon can make any size and style of body they choose for the M mount. As I said, I'd prefer an RF mount, but I'm not sure Canon will agree.


----------



## slclick (Jul 23, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I guess I don't understand this line of reasoning. To me, that's like saying that Canon couldn't possibly have made a 7D because the Rebels were not big enough or robust enough. The decision will be driven by the sensor size and the lens mount. The M mount is the mount Canon made for APS-C sensors in mirrorless cameras. Canon can make any size and style of body they choose for the M mount. As I said, I'd prefer an RF mount, but I'm not sure Canon will agree.


We all have our hunches and feelings about things Canon will do don't we? I'm basing mine on current and past build styles of the M line, not an apples to oranges situation at all. I don't see a rugged M in the future, an R crop aimed at fast AF birders and sports version, sure, that's easy to imagine, the R5 seems pretty damn rugged on paper as is. Still, if I had to put money on it, I'd say we'll see a higher MP with a particular pixel density sensor especially designed for a 1.6 crop on a FF, possibly that 83 sensor. Maybe a merging of lines for both sports and higher rez. Canon has a history of it with the 1D line.


----------



## yungfat (Jul 23, 2020)

It’s finally time to sell all my EF lens...


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 23, 2020)

yungfat said:


> It’s finally time to sell all my EF lens...


Not me, I will just use them with the EF/RF adapter. Over time (years) I will replace some as significantly better RF lenses become available.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 23, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I'm more concerned about how the EVF affects the eyes, I've never used EVFs for long periods of time, but even short periods cause discomfort to me. But I'm shooting more and more landscapes and less and less action, especially this year, so I'll mostly be using the LCD screen.



Of course everyone is different and effected by things differently, but generally speaking, shooting with an EVF isn’t some medieval torture. I’ve spent over half of my life shooting through EVF’s, from B&W CRT’s, to LCD’s and OLED’s today. But, I haven’t shot With an R5 or really any mirrorless EVF and am basing what I’m saying on my experiences with EVF’s that we use on video cameras, which are MUCH larger and moveable.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 23, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Sony A9II EVF at 120Hz is reported to be very good. I didn't try it myself, but the R5/R6 have even faster readout and CPU and also have 120Hz EVFs.
> 
> ...
> 
> Additional delays during continuous shooting - again the A9II is said to be very good at it, I expect the R5 to be on par. Time will tell.



You need to temper your expectations, especially when comparing to an A9. The A9's sensor is very different than anything else on the market. You gotta post a source if you say stuff like the "R5/R6 have even faster readout" because based on what I've seen there's zero evidence the R6, let alone the R5 will readout faster than a stacked sensor.

I am firmly in the "R5 is the best camera ever!!" camp but it's not gonna break the laws of physics.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 23, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> You need to temper your expectations, especially when comparing to an A9. The A9's sensor is very different than anything else on the market. You gotta post a source if you say stuff like the "R5/R6 have even faster readout" because based on what I've seen there's zero evidence the R6, let alone the R5 will readout faster than a stacked sensor.


Ok I'm not sure about readout but the R5 is able to shoot and process 8K and 4K/120 so it should be on par with Sony. Also the R5 shoots the same 20 fps in continuous shooting as the A9II, but from a higher-resolution sensor.
Specifically for a 5Mp EVF you don't even need to read the whole sensor.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 23, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> No it doesn't work like that because it's meaningless, and also requires multithreading. If you have 2 frames being processed at the same time, you need 2 threads, 3 frames - 3 threads etc. It simply doesn't work like that.
> 
> ...
> 
> What heppens in reality, the whole pipeline after the capture is basically readout plus applying some filters (de-mosaicing + current image style), after which it's basically ready for EVF right away. There's no point in breaking it down into many steps separated in time.



First off a Digic's DSP is not a CPU in the way an intel processor is and I'd caution you about getting too much into thread counts per frames and things like that but it's not like I have an X-ray of a de-lidded Digic so what do I know.

On the main point though, you're handwaving through a lot of steps, each which add latency. How quickly can a Digic X de-bayer a frame? How quickly can you load the resulting frame into the EVF's frame buffer? Yes, the entire system clearly operates at 120cycles per second (I mean it shoots 4K 120 ffs!) but all these little 5ms delays add up and then you put a giant 200ms delay for the wetware's reaction time and it all adds up. Which is why it's important to anticipate action. Which is exactly what OVF die hards say an EVF makes harder.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 23, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Ok I'm not sure about readout but the R5 is able to shoot and process 8K and 4K/120 so it should be on par with Sony. Also the R5 shoots the same 20 fps in continuous shooting as the A9II, but from a higher-resolution sensor.
> Specifically for a 5Mp EVF you don't even need to read the whole sensor.



To be clear here:
- I a personally 100% unconcerned about the R5's EVF's latency. I think it will be stellar based on specs and the reviews to Date. (Battery, fatigue, etc are all other issues)
- This is all pure speculation until it's measured

But there's a conflation of latency with throughput in a lot of this thread, and it's really doing the discussion a disservice.

The optical path from a photon hitting the front of a lens to an OVF is effectively 0ms of latency. The digital path from photon>sensor>read>de-bayer>framebuffer>EVF is non zero. Doesn't matter if it's a 1fps or a 1000fps camera. Is that latency enough to matter? *We don't know yet*! But you can't say with a ton of confidence that the A9 with a low(er) DR, lower mp, stacked CMOS sensor will have the same characteristics as the R5s when it comes to latency, even if the R5 can clearly push more bits per second through its' pipeline end to end. Close enough to not matter? *We don't know yet*

The only point here is, again, let's not use camera forum physics and electrical engineering to tell somebody that their opinion of an OVF is wrong. If you've got a peer reviewed study or some hard numbers about processing time in either cameras' imaging pipelines, by all means, let's have at it.


----------



## MrGuyWithACamera (Jul 23, 2020)

This actually makes me really sad. Like I understand why, but I've been shooting with their 6D series for a while now and I've wanted to get into the 5d series but I put off buying a mk iv in hopes of the mk v coming out as their last 5d series.


----------



## MrGuyWithACamera (Jul 23, 2020)

Maximilian said:


> I suppose the preorders of the R5 were too good.
> 
> Sad, because I I thought the Mark IV was not an adequate final point for this series.
> Good tool but the series would have deserved something with big icing on top.


Honestly I'd be happy with like a 5Dmkiv SE


----------



## unfocused (Jul 23, 2020)

slclick said:


> We all have our hunches and feelings about things Canon will do don't we? I'm basing mine on current and past build styles of the M line, not an apples to oranges situation at all. I don't see a rugged M in the future, an R crop aimed at fast AF birders and sports version, sure, that's easy to imagine, the R5 seems pretty damn rugged on paper as is. Still, if I had to put money on it, I'd say we'll see a higher MP with a particular pixel density sensor especially designed for a 1.6 crop on a FF, possibly that 83 sensor. Maybe a merging of lines for both sports and higher rez. Canon has a history of it with the 1D line.


Actually, I think that is the most likely scenario as well. Cropping to 1.6 is so easy with the R (In fact, I'm embarrassed to admit that I inadvertently turned it on once during an event) that the only reason for a dedicated APS-C sensor R camera that I can imagine would be cost and I'm not sure Canon would have any incentive to make or sell an APS-C R camera at a substantial discount.

When the original 7D first came out, the production cost between full frame and crop sensor was substantial and the 7D offered people a premium camera at a significantly more affordable price than full frame. Now, with bargain full frames available, that market isn't as significant. 

In my mind, that only leaves the birding, wildlife and sports enthusiast market that wants a crop sensor for more perceived reach (often as a second body). That market is not very price sensitive, so I'm not sure Canon really has to offer a dedicated APS-C body at all, if a high megapixel body can meet the same need. Particularly if people are trading two camera purchases for one.


----------



## tron (Jul 23, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Actually, I think that is the most likely scenario as well. Cropping to 1.6 is so easy with the R (In fact, I'm embarrassed to admit that I inadvertently turned it on once during an event) that the only reason for a dedicated APS-C sensor R camera that I can imagine would be cost and I'm not sure Canon would have any incentive to make or sell an APS-C R camera at a substantial discount.
> 
> When the original 7D first came out, the production cost between full frame and crop sensor was substantial and the 7D offered people a premium camera at a significantly more affordable price than full frame. Now, with bargain full frames available, that market isn't as significant.
> 
> In my mind, that only leaves the birding, wildlife and sports enthusiast market that wants a crop sensor for more perceived reach (often as a second body). That market is not very price sensitive, so I'm not sure Canon really has to offer a dedicated APS-C body at all, if a high megapixel body can meet the same need. Particularly if people are trading two camera purchases for one.


You reminded me of 1Ds series. But there is nothing like that like 1Dxs for example with 50mp 10fps with huge buffer too. Or a 5DsRII with the same (50) Mpixels also with 10fps and big buffer to take advantage of the big EF-white teles...


----------



## Otara (Jul 23, 2020)

slclick said:


> I just cannot put my faith in its dependability, its build. It feels like a toy to me. And even though I don't feel a as if you read or maybe understood more than the first few words of what I wrote, I do agree with your last sentiment, it's not for me. Between owning a iphone and a FF dslr with a variety of glass, the M family isn't needed. Believe me,I gave it the old college try, it failed just like my M43 experiment a few years back as well. It always went back to one thing, build.These things won't survive the shortest drop or remain unscathed while being bumped in the field. The shit my 7D and 5D cameras have been though, it really impresses me.


 
But you and if not you, most certainly others would, if the only choice was between it and say a 5kg 2mp camera shooting at 1fps that focussed badly, no matter how indestructible it was.

Things usually arent as absolute as they can be discussed here, everyone has different priorities and the differences are often less extreme than they tend to be portrayed here. 

Anyhow we'll see.


----------



## slclick (Jul 24, 2020)

tron said:


> You reminded me of 1Ds series. But there is nothing like that like 1Dxs for example with 50mp 10fps with huge buffer too. Or a 5DsRII with the same (50) Mpixels also with 10fps and big buffer to take advantage of the big EF-white teles...


No, but as stated in the post where I referred to them doing it with the 1D line, they COULD with the R series. So, not sure why you have to point out what does not exist.


----------



## tron (Jul 24, 2020)

slclick said:


> No, but as stated in the post where I referred to them doing it with the 1D line, they COULD with the R series. So, not sure why you have to point out what does not exist.


Yes I am sure all birders could use EVF instead of OVF carry a ton of batteries and use the big whites with adapters


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 24, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> No it doesn't work like that because it's meaningless, and also requires multithreading.



It's not meaningless, it does work like that, and multithreading is a separate and higher level issue. (Threads are abstractions for programmers.)



> With a single thread, the processing MUST be less than 1/120s, it's simple math.



When you talk about threading, you are talking about the programmer's view of the middle of what I'm calling the pipeline. In the middle the raw sensor data is in memory and has to be processed to a form that is used by the EVF display.

Even if this middle was a single thread/single core stage that completed a frame every 1/120, it still would be coordinated with other hardware events. And latency would still be >1/120. And I doubt this is a single thread/single core event. It's a pretty good bet that at 60 or 120 Hz multiple EVF frames are being worked on by multiple cores...at different stages...simultaneously.



> What heppens in reality, the whole pipeline after the capture is basically readout plus applying some filters (de-mosaicing + current image style), after which it's basically ready for EVF right away. There's no point in breaking it down into many steps separated in time.



You have far too simplistic an understanding of the hardware events which must take place and the time which would be involved.



> Of course it's shared memory/direct memory access by EVF. They do processing in a buffer and the EVF switches to the buffer right away, there's no additional copying/writing anywhere. Basically it takes two alternating buffers.



Again, I think you're confusing high level abstraction with what actually happens on the silicon. Either the EVF reads from the same RAM used by the ARM processor (modern DIGIC uses ARM cores with added instructions), or it reads from its own display buffer on a discrete bus. If the former, memory I/O must be coordinated with the processor. If the latter, it still has to be coordinated but at far fewer points for less memory contention. Basically with the latter the processor and EVF can be performing memory I/O simultaneously.

Given that there's already memory contention with multiple cores, sensor readout, etc., I would be shocked if there aren't separate buffers and discrete buses at certain points. The EVF would be the first candidate for such a buffer to reduce contention for the main memory bus.


----------



## chik0240 (Jul 24, 2020)

tron said:


> Yes I am sure all birders could use EVF instead of OVF carry a ton of batteries and use the big whites with adapters


Not only that, going to a long mountain camp with a 5D series might need only 4 batteries for a 2 weeks or even one month camp for amazing landscapes, but if with a MILC... good luck for power


----------



## yungfat (Jul 24, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> Not me, I will just use them with the EF/RF adapter. Over time (years) I will replace some as significantly better RF lenses become available.


Agreed with you.
There are some benefits by adapting EF lens to RF Mount by using the drop in filter adapter.

My L Lens is now left 16-35mm f/4 & 70-200mm f/2.8, and the RF offering is impressive due to the small size and lighter weight for 70-200mm.

I don't see myself will using filter so much as I'm not really in landscape photography.

Therefore I would slowly let go my lens and switch to RF for the years to come.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 24, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> This is why there are two readings for the number four, _shi_ and _yon_. Whenever possible, people try to avoid using the deathy one (shi). The Japanese also have two readings for nine as one sounds like the word for agony and torture.


I used to know the numbers from one to fifteen, but have forgotten them. In grad school in Dallas, I had a friend from Japan. He and my other friends had a house rule when shooting pool that we had to call our shots in Japanese.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 24, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> It's not meaningless, it does work like that, and multithreading is a separate and higher level issue. (Threads are abstractions for programmers.)



There's threading API as abstraction for programmers, and there's hardware threads/CPU cores.



dtaylor said:


> When you talk about threading, you are talking about the programmer's view of the middle of what I'm calling the pipeline. In the middle the raw sensor data is in memory and has to be processed to a form that is used by the EVF display.



Nope I'm talking about both. With DIGIC, the processing pipeline is all software, shall it be in RAM or ROM or executed within different DIGIC components. There are hardwired modules within DIGIC but it doesn't change anything in terms of this discussion. It doesn't matter at all for the purpose of this talk.



dtaylor said:


> You have far too simplistic an understanding of the hardware events which must take place and the time which would be involved.



In DIGIC everything is processed as software, just running on different CPUs. There's also programmable ASIC modules to speed some operations up, but it doesn't change anything conceptually.



dtaylor said:


> Again, I think you're confusing high level abstraction with what actually happens on the silicon.



Anything that happens in the silicon is digital signal processing, that is, a program. We don't know the exact architecture, but the only thing that actually matters for this discussion - how much of parallel processing is happening there. 
Parallel in the sense that two or more consecutive captured frames are processed at the same time. I don't think that's what's happening there, it's meaningless and takes more memory.



dtaylor said:


> Given that there's already memory contention with multiple cores, sensor readout, etc., I would be shocked if there aren't separate buffers and discrete buses at certain points. The EVF would be the first candidate for such a buffer to reduce contention for the main memory bus.



There could be separate buffers. Or it may be same shared memory. Neither will add milliseconds to prostprocessing latency.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 24, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> The optical path from a photon hitting the front of a lens to an OVF is effectively 0ms of latency. The digital path from photon>sensor>read>de-bayer>framebuffer>EVF is non zero. Doesn't matter if it's a 1fps or a 1000fps camera. Is that latency enough to matter?



There's a threshold where the latency doesn't matter because typical human reaction time before pressing the shutter button is about 0.1s. So 1s latency obviously matters, 0.033s (30Hz EVF) perhaps matters, and 0.0083s (120Hz EVF) - is probably negligible. That applies to cases when you take a single shot and your camera stays still. When you do continuous shooting, good focusing system matters a lot more than EVF's delay.

When you do panning and follow your subject, it'll heavily depend on the angular speed of your subject. I guess for extreme cases 0.0083s may not be enough.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 24, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> There's a threshold where the latency doesn't matter because typical human reaction time before pressing the shutter button is about 0.1s. So 1s latency obviously matters, 0.033s (30Hz EVF) perhaps matters, and 0.0083s (120Hz EVF) - is probably negligible. That applies to cases when you take a single shot and your camera stays still. When you do continuous shooting, good focusing system matters a lot more than EVF's delay.
> 
> When you do panning and follow your subject, it'll heavily depend on the angular speed of your subject. I guess for extreme cases 0.0083s may not be enough.



I will take one more stab at this:

Latency vs Throughput - you keep calculating “Latency” in terms of Frame rate. The refresh of the OLED is a component of latency but it is only one component. You cannot just say 120hz=5ms=no problem.

Human Performance - Reaction time varies wildly depending on task. But given that you’re adding the lag of the digital system to the human reaction time, every ms just adds up. And again, if you’ve been shooting motor sports or falcons diving at 200mph for over a decade, you be learned to anticipate that shot. An EVF delay may require you to relearn that anticipation. (And this is additive to shuttle release delays as well)

Thresholds and the point of this - I agree there is a latency so low it doesn’t matter. OVFs still have latency just very, very low latency because photons are pretty quick little suckers 

The point is that you don’t know the latency of this system. I do not know it. Only some engineers at canon do, along with any reviewers who bothered to rig a test in the last few days. All we really know is it’s non-zero, and that it’s larger than the latency of an OVF. You and I are unconcerned, assuming it’s good enough or perhaps even imperceptible. Others are concerned.


----------



## Soren Hakanlind (Jul 25, 2020)

The gap between R5 and R6 is to big. As a professional with a lot of EF-lenses, the 5dm4 and 1X is perfekt for me. I don't need the video stuff in the R5 and the R6 have only around 20 megapixels. If the R6 have had around 30 megapixels it would have been an easy choice. But now? I'm still waiting for the Eos 5dmk5. Come on! We are thousands of professional photographers waiting for the Eos 5DmarkV! We want 30-35mp and the same specs as in the R6.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 25, 2020)

Soren Hakanlind said:


> The gap between R5 and R6 is to big. As a professional with a lot of EF-lenses, the 5dm4 and 1X is perfekt for me. I don't need the video stuff in the R5 and the R6 have only around 20 megapixels. If the R6 have had around 30 megapixels it would have been an easy choice. But now? I'm still waiting for the Eos 5dmk5. Come on! We are thousands of professional photographers waiting for the Eos 5DmarkV! We want 30-35mp and the same specs as in the R6.


Updated R with joystick and dual card slot...same cropped video and 32 mp.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 25, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I guess I don't understand this line of reasoning. To me, that's like saying that Canon couldn't possibly have made a 7D because the Rebels were not big enough or robust enough. The decision will be driven by the sensor size and the lens mount. The M mount is the mount Canon made for APS-C sensors in mirrorless cameras a specific market segment desiring compact, lightweight, and affordable cameras with a limited number of lightweight, compact, and affordable lenses. Canon can make any size and style of body they choose for the M mount. As I said, I'd prefer an RF mount, but I'm not sure Canon will agree.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 25, 2020)

MrGuyWithACamera said:


> This actually makes me really sad. Like I understand why, but I've been shooting with their 6D series for a while now and I've wanted to get into the 5d series but I put off buying a mk iv in hopes of the mk v coming out as their last 5d series.



There's never been a better time to buy a 5D Mark IV. Canon authorized dealers in the U.S. were recently selling them for $1,999 USD. Those factory sponsored "instant rebates" have expired, but they'll probably return with the fall rebate season. The 5D Mark IV is a LOT of camera for less than $2K!


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 25, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Actually, I think that is the most likely scenario as well. Cropping to 1.6 is so easy with the R (In fact, I'm embarrassed to admit that I inadvertently turned it on once during an event) that the only reason for a dedicated APS-C sensor R camera that I can imagine would be cost and I'm not sure Canon would have any incentive to make or sell an APS-C R camera at a substantial discount.
> 
> When the original 7D first came out, the production cost between full frame and crop sensor was substantial and the 7D offered people a premium camera at a significantly more affordable price than full frame. Now, with bargain full frames available, that market isn't as significant.
> 
> In my mind, that only leaves the birding, wildlife and sports enthusiast market that wants a crop sensor for more perceived reach (often as a second body). That market is not very price sensitive, so I'm not sure Canon really has to offer a dedicated APS-C body at all, if a high megapixel body can meet the same need. Particularly if people are trading two camera purchases for one.



In my experience the birding, wildlife, and sports market are the only folks that bought the 7D line in any significant numbers. Even more so with the 7D Mark II than with the original 7D.

For sports, at least, it was not just driven by enthusiasts but also by semi-pros on a very tight budget shooting youth league, high school, and even small college sports and trying to make more in sales than they spent on gear. Admittedly, that class of photographers has been slowly disappearing since the 7D Mark II was rolled out in late 2014 as it seems harder and harder to get folks to actually _buy_ event-based photographs.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 25, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> You have far too simplistic an understanding of the hardware events which must take place and the time which would be involved.



^^^^^^^^^^^THIS!!!^^^^^^^^^^^


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 25, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> Latency vs Throughput - you keep calculating “Latency” in terms of Frame rate.



No I don't. There's delay after the capture/exposure and there's delay between the physical event and displaying it in the EVF.



davidhfe said:


> The refresh of the OLED is a component of latency but it is only one component. You cannot just say 120hz=5ms=no problem.



120hz ≘ 1/120s = 8.3ms and I've never said it wasn't a problem. The argument above was mostly about a possibility for the delay to be more than 1/120s. I was arguing there's no mysterious pipelines that have several frames in the queue so that the actual latency is more than 1/120s.

Also I was saying, the gap between OVFs and EVFs is narrowing down especially with 120Hz EVFs. The lag of less than 10% of human reaction time is negligible in most practical cases.



davidhfe said:


> But given that you’re adding the lag of the digital system to the human reaction time, every ms just adds up. And again, if you’ve been shooting motor sports or falcons diving at 200mph for over a decade, you be learned to anticipate that shot. An EVF delay may require you to relearn that anticipation. (And this is additive to shuttle release delays as well)



200mph doesn't matter, what matters is the angular speed. Some objects moving relatively slow but close to the camera may have high angular speed. And a high-speed object moving directly towards camera is more challenging to the AF, not to the EVF with its latency.

And that's exactly what I said in the previous message - for objects with high angular speed even 1/120s may be a problem. It is a problem but in niche applications. Yes you may need to re-learn to frame properly and/or zoom out a bit etc.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 25, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> In my experience the birding, wildlife, and sports market are the only folks that bought the 7D line in any significant numbers. Even more so with the 7D Mark II than with the original 7D.
> 
> For sports, at least, it was not just driven by enthusiasts but also by semi-pros on a very tight budget shooting youth league, high school, and even small college sports and trying to make more in sales than they spent on gear. Admittedly, that class of photographers has been slowly disappearing since the 7D Mark II was rolled out in late 2014 as it seems harder and harder to get folks to actually _buy_ event-based photographs.


Some years back I went to a Kelby seminar at the convention center in Charlotte. At a break I found out that folks around me had sons playing high school football. They all either had a 7D or hoped to buy one soon. One guy sold photos to other parents and did pretty well with it for a hobby, plus he was shooting his own son anyway.

At the other end of the scale, I have a friend who shoots college sports professionally. He has contracts with various schools in the area and sells photos from his web site. His photos also appear in newspapers and on their web sites. He said that cancellation of spring sports had cost him $50k in income up to that point. Fall sports don't sound promising. His work is excellent. He shoots Nikons, so I don't know the models, but I would assume something top end. He obviously has some really long lenses. He has flash guns stationed in the rafters of the basketball arena here. He says that is how he gets such good color balance, yet I never notice the flashes going off during games. The arena has installed new lights that look better on TV, so he might not need the flash as much. With the old lights when I shot video it had a bit of sickly green cast to it. I was shooting pick-up games, so the camera was seeing all the empty red seats, and AWB shifted toward cyan, I guess. I did try one night using a white card to set a custom balance, but it didn't help much. I'm not great working with color grading in FCP X. Last year I was in Denmark when the games were played, and of course they didn't happen this year. So I've not tried shooting under the new lights. I'm not sure whether they would use them during pick-up games anyway, maybe just for real games for TV. If life is closer to normal next year, maybe I'll find out, or I'll feel let out of a cage and leave for Norway or somewhere else cool that I haven't been to.


----------



## bbb34 (Jul 25, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> 120hz = 1/120s = 8.3ms



I assume you know this is wrong notation, but in any case: please don't write it. It causes a migraine looking at it! 

120 Hz = 120 1/s

1 / 120 Hz = (1 / 120) s = 8.3 ms​
To keep it short, one may use one of the symbols that are used for "corresponds to", like ≙ or ≘

120 Hz ≘ 8.3 ms​


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 25, 2020)

bbb34 said:


> I assume you know this is wrong notation, but in any case: please don't write it. It causes a migraine looking at it!
> 
> 120 Hz = 120 1/s
> 
> ...



Ok, I fixed it for you! Of course it was wrong notation because of different units.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 25, 2020)

stevelee said:


> Some years back I went to a Kelby seminar at the convention center in Charlotte. At a break I found out that folks around me had sons playing high school football. They all either had a 7D or hoped to buy one soon. One guy sold photos to other parents and did pretty well with it for a hobby, plus he was shooting his own son anyway.
> 
> At the other end of the scale, I have a friend who shoots college sports professionally. He has contracts with various schools in the area and sells photos from his web site. His photos also appear in newspapers and on their web sites. He said that cancellation of spring sports had cost him $50k in income up to that point. Fall sports don't sound promising. His work is excellent. He shoots Nikons, so I don't know the models, but I would assume something top end. He obviously has some really long lenses. He has flash guns stationed in the rafters of the basketball arena here. He says that is how he gets such good color balance, yet I never notice the flashes going off during games. The arena has installed new lights that look better on TV, so he might not need the flash as much. With the old lights when I shot video it had a bit of sickly green cast to it. I was shooting pick-up games, so the camera was seeing all the empty red seats, and AWB shifted toward cyan, I guess. I did try one night using a white card to set a custom balance, but it didn't help much. I'm not great working with color grading in FCP X. Last year I was in Denmark when the games were played, and of course they didn't happen this year. So I've not tried shooting under the new lights. I'm not sure whether they would use them during pick-up games anyway, maybe just for real games for TV. If life is closer to normal next year, maybe I'll find out, or I'll feel let out of a cage and leave for Norway or somewhere else cool that I haven't been to.



If a school installs new lighting in their gym to make it better for TV cameras, it's not really a "small" college in my mind. It may be small for a D1 program, but that's a far cry from truly small non-scholarshipped D3 programs or even NAIA programs.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 25, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Ok, I fixed it for you! Of course it was wrong notation because of different units.



Actually, 1/120 Hz would be one cycle every 120 seconds, not 120 cycles per (one) second.

120 cycles per second is 120Hz, not 1/120Hz.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 25, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> 120 cycles per second is 120Hz, not 1/120Hz.



bbb34 was referring to the fact that 1 / (120 Hz) is 8.3ms. In terms of physics units, 1/Hz = second, and 1/secons = Hz.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 25, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Actually, 1/120 Hz would be one cycle every 120 seconds, not 120 cycles per (one) second.
> 
> 120 cycles per second is 120Hz, not 1/120Hz.


one cycle every 120 seconds is a slow peloton, like here (5DIII + 70-200mm /4 IS).


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 25, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> There's threading API as abstraction for programmers, and there's hardware threads/CPU cores.



There are no "hardware threads." Threads are entirely an abstraction for programmers. There are silicon features to make that abstraction work better and more efficiently, but a processor does not know what a "thread" is nor does it manage them apart from executing the related functions in an OS.



> Nope I'm talking about both. With DIGIC, the processing pipeline is all software,



Again, your understanding of what's happening at the hardware level...the pieces of silicon and the buses they use to communicate...is far too simplistic. To give a view that's still simplified but illustrates what I mean: while DIGIC does its thing on bytes in RAM (the middle), the sensor is exposing/reading/resetting, and the EVF is refreshing its physical elements.

While some of what you said about DIGIC is accurate, it's still the middle part, and it still says nothing about how long it takes to process a frame nor whether or not multiple frames are worked on simultaneously to sustain 120 fps throughput.



> We don't know the exact architecture, but the only thing that actually matters for this discussion - how much of parallel processing is happening there.



That's only a part of what matters. We keep losing sight of what people really notice and that's stutter while burst shooting, the 'bubbles' in the pipeline when the EVF has to exposure and readout a full resolution frame and the DIGIC processor has to work on that full resolution frame.



> Parallel in the sense that two or more consecutive captured frames are processed at the same time. I don't think that's what's happening there, it's meaningless and takes more memory.



It's quite meaningful if a single core cannot prepare 120 frames for the EVF every second. The frames are roughly 1.92mp (3 dots in an EVF = 1 pixel) and have to be debayered, brightness adjusted, and color adjusted at the minimum. Hard to say without knowing core frequency, memory bus speed, what other steps are involved, and what special instructions have been added to the ARM instruction set in DIGIC. But I would guess more than one core is involved.



> There could be separate buffers. Or it may be same shared memory. Neither will add milliseconds to prostprocessing latency.



Memory contention can produce those kinds of performance impacts. RAM is slow which is why processors have three levels of cache with typically two that are discrete to each core (third shared for all cores). And RAM is really slow when multiple cores all stall waiting for access to the memory controller and bus. Now I could be wrong and the EVF could use main memory directly to refresh its physical pixels. I'm not saying it's impossible to coordinate the memory accesses and keep it all smooth. But the odds are there's a discrete buffer.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 25, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I was arguing there's no mysterious pipelines that have several frames in the queue so that the actual latency is more than 1/120s.



We know what you're arguing, but your argument rests on a very simple and inaccurate view of what's happening on the silicon. Right off the bat there's a sensor, DIGIC, and an EVF. So even with that still oversimplified view there are 3 frames in play at any given moment: the frame being captured, the frame being processed, and the frame being refreshed to the EVF. Latency from the moment the event occurred to the moment you see it on screen would be 16.6ms even if DIGIC broke the laws of physics and did its work instantaneously.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 26, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> If a school installs new lighting in their gym to make it better for TV cameras, it's not really a "small" college in my mind. It may be small for a D1 program, but that's a far cry from truly small non-scholarshipped D3 programs or even NAIA programs.


It is a small school in terms of enrollment, but plays D1 sports in the Atlantic 10. My friend's clients are all division 1 schools, mostly in the Southern Conference. The pick-up games I have shot came after hours at basketball camp. Former players, pros from Europe, current players, incoming freshmen, prospects, friends of some of the above, and sometimes some Charlotte Hornets would play. So the game are private, and I promised the coach that any video I post on YouTube will have restricted circulation. Before I started shooting the videos, Steph Curry who was already a pro and his little brother Seth who was still playing for Duke both played one night. Their dad Dell came, too, I guess to pick up Seth. We walked out together. I wish I had video of that night. Anyhow, my videos have a dedicated following, mostly people wanting to see how the new freshmen stack up. I would use the occasion to learn how to shoot video on whatever new camera I had, including my iPhone 6S one year. I shot 4K and edited it down to 1080p, using FCP X in essence, for digital zooming in. I always apologized for my bad color casts, but my audience didn't care.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 26, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> There are no "hardware threads." Threads are entirely an abstraction for programmers. There are silicon features to make that abstraction work better and more efficiently, but a processor does not know what a "thread" is nor does it manage them apart from executing the related functions in an OS.



Of course there are lol, I've been worked with multithreading and real-time systems for many years, including non-Intel h/w architectures. Maybe do some googling on 'software vs hardware threads'. On certain devices and corresponding operating systems you have direct control on h/w threads through the application-level API (there's always control on the operating system level).



dtaylor said:


> Again, your understanding of what's happening at the hardware level...the pieces of silicon and the buses they use to communicate...is far too simplistic. To give a view that's still simplified but illustrates what I mean: while DIGIC does its thing on bytes in RAM (the middle), the sensor is exposing/reading/resetting, and the EVF is refreshing its physical elements.



It is simplistic in terms of Canon h/w architecture because we don't know everything. But what you're saying here doesn't change anything in my point, and I've already highlighted several times before that most likely the system is doing postprocessing while the sensor is doing exposure. From the beginning I was calculating the delay between readout and displaying the processed buffer in the EVF. It didn't include exposure time.

Try drawing a timeline diagram and you'll see that your pipeline can't be taking more than 1/120s if there's only one frame's data in the pipeline.



dtaylor said:


> It's quite meaningful if a single core cannot prepare 120 frames for the EVF every second. The frames are roughly 1.92mp (3 dots in an EVF = 1 pixel) and have to be debayered, brightness adjusted, and color adjusted at the minimum. Hard to say without knowing core frequency, memory bus speed, what other steps are involved, and what special instructions have been added to the ARM instruction set in DIGIC. But I would guess more than one core is involved.



All these adjustments can be done in one go, and I suspect there's some parallel processing happening, but crucially, no more than one captured frame in the pipeline.



dtaylor said:


> Memory contention can produce those kinds of performance impacts. RAM is slow which is why processors have three levels of cache with typically two that are discrete to each core (third shared for all cores). And RAM is really slow when multiple cores all stall waiting for access to the memory controller and bus. Now I could be wrong and the EVF could use main memory directly to refresh its physical pixels. I'm not saying it's impossible to coordinate the memory accesses and keep it all smooth. But the odds are there's a discrete buffer.



Have you ever heard of CPU cache? L1, L2?.. There is L1 and L2 caches in ARM CPUs, I guess DIGIC X isn't an exception. In fact the feed for EVF is very small and lightweight compared to the full video data or continuous shooting.



dtaylor said:


> Latency from the moment the event occurred to the moment you see it on screen would be 16.6ms even if DIGIC broke the laws of physics and did its work instantaneously.



Again try drawing a timeline diagram. My point is, the delay between readout and EVF shouldn't be longer than 1/120s. That's an upper limit, in fact it can be less than that. Now the delay between the physical event and EVF may be longer (and I covered it in this thread already) but the added time can't be longer than the exposure time. If a flash happens during exposure, you'll see it in the EVF in the nearest frame update.


----------



## Michael Clark (Jul 26, 2020)

stevelee said:


> It is a small school in terms of enrollment, but plays D1 sports in the Atlantic 10. My friend's clients are all division 1 schools, mostly in the Southern Conference. The pick-up games I have shot came after hours at basketball camp. Former players, pros from Europe, current players, incoming freshmen, prospects, friends of some of the above, and sometimes some Charlotte Hornets would play. So the game are private, and I promised the coach that any video I post on YouTube will have restricted circulation. Before I started shooting the videos, Steph Curry who was already a pro and his little brother Seth who was still playing for Duke both played one night. Their dad Dell came, too, I guess to pick up Seth. We walked out together. I wish I had video of that night. Anyhow, my videos have a dedicated following, mostly people wanting to see how the new freshmen stack up. I would use the occasion to learn how to shoot video on whatever new camera I had, including my iPhone 6S one year. I shot 4K and edited it down to 1080p, using FCP X in essence, for digital zooming in. I always apologized for my bad color casts, but my audience didn't care.




Regardless of enrollment, a D1 athletic program is not what I consider "small". D2/D3/NAIA is what I'm talking about.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 26, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Regardless of enrollment, a D1 athletic program is not what I consider "small". D2/D3/NAIA is what I'm talking about.


I'm sorry. I have no idea of what message long ago in this thread got me to talking about video color casts and got you to talking about the definition of the word "small." I think at some point I had posted about meeting parents of high school football players who either had or wanted the 7D.

But yes, in terms of budgets, D1 costs a lot more than other divisions. That's why many very fine schools choose not to go the D1 scholarship route. I have met the men's basketball coaches at Swathmore and Emory. Both are doing excellent work where they are in D3, vying for national championships. Both would make fine D1 coaches. I met the Emory coach several years ago when his son was in basketball camp here and were watching the after hours pick-up game together. I know much better an assistant coach at Dartmouth and the head coach at Macalester. Both would call me by name if they saw me. That all strikes me as odd, since I don't even consider myself a sports fan.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 26, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Of course there are lol, I've been worked with multithreading and real-time systems for many years, including non-Intel h/w architectures.



Tell me what instructions in x86, x86-64, or ARM allow you to spawn threads that are managed by the silicon without an OS. Which instructions do I use to set thread stack size, priority, pause/resume threads, kill them? (Hint: they're not there.)

Again, there are instructions and features on the silicon designed to make thread switching and management more efficient, but that's not the same thing as a "hardware thread." When people use that term they are talking about those features, they are not implying that the CPU can spawn/manage/retire a pool of threads all on its own.



> Try drawing a timeline diagram and you'll see that your pipeline can't be taking more than 1/120s if there's only one frame's data in the pipeline.



I can draw a timeline with 120 fps throughput and a 120 SECOND latency. Nothing about 120 fps throughput demands a latency of any given length of time. Each STEP has to be 1/120th or less, but not all the steps combined.



> All these adjustments can be done in one go,



I have a paper on my drive describing one of the fastest demosaicing algorithms known. The algorithm is not "one go", it would compile to many instructions for the CPU that have to be repeated for each pixel. And I don't see how brightness or color could be worked into the algorithm without increasing instruction count and execution time.



> but crucially, no more than one captured frame in the pipeline.



This entire debate boils down to you being unable to imagine a timeline that maintains 120 fps yet has a latency longer than 1/120th. Which I suspect is because you've never dealt with computing below a certain level. (Latency vs throughput is common in assembly because for the vast majority of execution units those are two different times. A 'pipeline' from sensor to EVF is no different in concept.) I've said from early on that your view of how this works is very high level and abstract.



> Have you ever heard of CPU cache? L1, L2?..



Did you really ask that after quoting me saying *"RAM is slow which is why processors have three levels of cache with typically two that are discrete to each core (third shared for all cores)."*? _Really???_



> There is L1 and L2 caches in ARM CPUs, I guess DIGIC X isn't an exception. In fact the feed for EVF is very small and lightweight compared to the full video data or continuous shooting.



Caches are small and do not make memory contention magically disappear. In fact, high level languages and design patterns often hamstring cache prediction algorithms which are, by nature of being part of the silicon, very simple. If the EVF does not have its own buffer then getting everything to work smoothly would likely involve some very careful fine tuning to make sure data is where it needs to be at certain clock cycles. OTOH just giving the EVF a buffer makes synchronization extremely simple.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 26, 2020)

Well it looks like we have our answer: 




There doesn't seem to be appreciable lag while not shooting. (Which does not mean latency = throughput. It just means latency is too small to be a human problem.) But when shooting both Tony and Chelsea struggled to keep the subject in frame. As I said earlier in this long winded debate, the bubbles introduced by full resolution capture/processing/storage is what most people notice and complain about. (Though general latency has been a problem as well on some EVFs.) I notice this stutter even on A9 bodies and while I think can anticipate/track reasonably well with those, it's still not as nice as an OVF.

Chelsea also noted battery life and thermal issues while shooting stills. Her battery only lasted 1 hour. And while the camera did not shut down shooting stills, switching to video she realized that shooting stills did drive up temperatures because she had only 2 minutes recording time available. This raises another issue in my mind that nobody seems to be looking at with mirrorless: what are the DR and high ISO measurements after the camera has been on with EVF and shooting for a while? I suspect it's one set of values in an air conditioned lab, and another after several hours of EVF and shooting. This may not matter for most shots, but for long exposure night/astro photography it could be significant.

Now I don't want to sound like a Sony fan claiming 'Canon is *******.' These are still very good cameras IMHO. The issues people are discovering are issues which exist across the mirrorless world. But those of us who complain that we prefer an OVF for some situations are vindicated (yet again). And until EVFs truly match OVFs, I would love to see DSLR versions of some R bodies.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 27, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> Tell me what instructions in x86, x86-64, or ARM allow you to spawn threads that are managed by the silicon without an OS. Which instructions do I use to set thread stack size, priority, pause/resume threads, kill them? (Hint: they're not there.)



"Managed by silicon" - why would we need that, especially in terms of this talk? Everything is controlled from code. In Intel CPUs, the threads are controlled through interruptions initially from the main thread/core. Each thread has its own set of registers. It's all supported 'in silicon', that's why there are hardware threads.



dtaylor said:


> Again, there are instructions and features on the silicon designed to make thread switching and management more efficient, but that's not the same thing as a "hardware thread." When people use that term they are talking about those features, they are not implying that the CPU can spawn/manage/retire a pool of threads all on its own.



They are not implying that, but a hardware thread means separate instruction pipeline and separate set of registers. That's why it's 'hardware'. The threads are obviously managed by the OS and nobody's ever implied the silicon would spawn threads on its own.

Also they're called 'threads' in the Intel CPU instruction manuals - so for manufacturers there are hardware threads but there's none for you? Or you're inventing new terminology just in order to prove you apparently incorrect statement that there's no hardware threads? Very interesting twist.



dtaylor said:


> I can draw a timeline with 120 fps throughput and a 120 SECOND latency. Nothing about 120 fps throughput demands a latency of any given length of time. Each STEP has to be 1/120th or less, but not all the steps combined.



You missed the point. Then you will have 120 frames processed at the same time in a single thread. In discrete steps, but you will have 120 frames in your pipeline and you will need 120x of memory buffers and you will need context switching every time you go from one frame's data to another. Which makes such a system absolutely pointless.



dtaylor said:


> I have a paper on my drive describing one of the fastest demosaicing algorithms known. The algorithm is not "one go", it would compile to many instructions for the CPU that have to be repeated for each pixel. And I don't see how brightness or color could be worked into the algorithm without increasing instruction count and execution time.



'In one go' = 'you don't need to switch context' and 'you don't need to walk the buffer several times'. Obviously you will need more instructions.



dtaylor said:


> Caches are small and do not make memory contention magically disappear.



An L2 cache can be as big as half the EVF buffer, worst case 5-10% of the buffer which still drastically increases performance if you don't do context switching and processing of multiple frames in the pipeline.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 27, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> "Managed by silicon" - why would we need that, especially in terms of this talk?



Because you keep insisting there are "hardware threads" and there are not.



> Each thread has its own set of registers.



At best a core has two sets of registers (hyperthreaded) and at 'worst' only one. The OS manages what's swapped in/out of those registers at any given moment as thread switching occurs.



> They are not implying that, but a hardware thread means separate instruction pipeline and separate set of registers.



Hyperthreaded cores do not have distinct execution pipelines for threads. Execution units, caches, and the system bus are all shared while some resources, like the register set, are duplicated. Hyperthreading is basically a way to keep execution pipelines better fed with instructions since any thread will tend to have stalls or bubbles which leave units idle.



> Or you're inventing new terminology just in order to prove you apparently incorrect statement that there's no hardware threads?



No, I am explaining what the terminology actually means. And that's relevant because when you first used the term you did so in a manner that implied the processors could do something that they cannot, like you do in this post.



> You missed the point. Then you will have 120 frames processed at the same time in a single thread.



Much more likely to have 120 separate threads. (Actually 120x120 since my example was 120s latency and 120 fps throughput.) But the point isn't that any camera would have such extreme latency or such an extreme configuration. The point is that latency is not limited or locked by throughput. They are separate measurements of time.



> 'In one go' = 'you don't need to switch context' and 'you don't need to walk the buffer several times'.



You're going to 'walk the buffer' (i.e. iterate over the bytes in the frame you're working on) more than once. And I kind of doubt that each core has a massive L2 cache. Perhaps I'm wrong and there are cores with large L2 caches to speed up EVF frame processing. That's possible (EVF frame should be just under 6 MB) and would be cool. But without a discrete EVF buffer you still have contention for the main memory bus because the EVF can't read those caches. If you have an EVF buffer that contention goes way down.

Whatever they did, however they designed it, I can tell you this: latency is almost certainly >8.3ms but low enough that experienced photographers (Tony and Chelsea) did not notice it. And burst shooting disrupts the flow severely enough to make tracking more difficult than an OVF, which they did notice.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 27, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> Well it looks like we have our answer:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



+++ But when shooting both Tony and Chelsea struggled to keep the subject in frame.
Thanks for pointing this out. I am wondering if the same issue Was confirmed for R6?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 27, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> Because you keep insisting there are "hardware threads" and there are not.



And that's a very amusing statement. The term 'hardware threads' doesn't imply they're 'managed by silicon' - in terms of modern CPU architecture(s), hardware threads imply independent instruction pipelines an/or independent contexts (that is registers). You can go here for example and figure out if there's any 'threads' in the CPU instructions.
Obviously there are software threads also, as an abstraction provided by the operating system for applications. There may be more software threads spawned than there's h/w threads.



dtaylor said:


> Hyperthreaded cores do not have distinct execution pipelines for threads. Execution units, caches, and the system bus are all shared while some resources, like the register set, are duplicated. Hyperthreading is basically a way to keep execution pipelines better fed with instructions since any *thread* will tend to have stalls or bubbles which leave units idle.



So you're mentioning hardware threads here but insist they don't exist.




dtaylor said:


> Much more likely to have 120 separate threads. (Actually 120x120 since my example was 120s latency and 120 fps throughput.)



That may also be the case (totally unrealistic but feasible), but that's what I stated myself in the beginning of this conversation. 



dtaylor said:


> You're going to 'walk the buffer' (i.e. iterate over the bytes in the frame you're working on) more than once



I guess it's a more complex process than just iteration, likely it processes the buffer in chunks, say 2x2 or 8x8 pixels. Almost certainly DIGIC with its special instructions can prepare the data for the EVF in one go and very fast, faster than 8.3ms.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 27, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> +++ But when shooting both Tony and Chelsea struggled to keep the subject in frame.
> Thanks for pointing this out. I am wondering if the same issue Was confirmed for R6?


To be fair, I couldn't keep a bird in frame with a 2xTC on a 500mm L IS (first version) using a DSLR - too heavy and too narrow fov. Chelsea is quite a woman to manage that.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 27, 2020)

bbb34 said:


> I assume you know this is wrong notation, but in any case: please don't write it. It causes a migraine looking at it!
> 
> 120 Hz = 120 1/s
> 
> ...


How many here used CPS, KC, MC when in high school? They changed to HZ and KHZ and more we did not have much call to use GHZ back then.


----------



## bbb34 (Jul 27, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> How many here used CPS, KC, MC when in high school? They changed to HZ and KHZ and more we did not have much call to use GHZ back then.



Not me. I went to school in Germany. There, the Hertz was accepted as part of the MKS system in 1935. I'm a tad to young to have witnessed that.

When did schools in the USA and in the UK switch from CPS to Hz?


----------



## chik0240 (Jul 27, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> Well it looks like we have our answer:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Right this is exactly what I don’t like about mirrorless, the lag is fine for me 80% of the time but once a while I do shoot sports where that lag is a problem, it’s that the varying lag causing the human misinterpreted the actual movement to keep the subject in frame. And battery in real life is a real problem. Imagine in vacation i normally walk whole day without any chance to charge, that battery life is making me mandatory to carry some 4-5 batteries daily which is 1) expensive and 2) takes forever to charge


----------



## stevelee (Jul 27, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> How many here used CPS, KC, MC when in high school? They changed to HZ and KHZ and more we did not have much call to use GHZ back then.


When I was in high school, humans had 48 chromosomes and we had nine planets.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 27, 2020)

stevelee said:


> When I was in high school, humans had 48 chromosomes and we had nine planets.



From Wikipedia: "The number of human chromosomes was published in 1923 by Theophilus Painter. By inspection through the microscope, he counted 24 pairs, which would mean 48 chromosomes. His error was copied by others and it was not until 1956 that the true number, 46, was determined by Indonesia-born cytogeneticist Joe Hin Tjio."

In other words, that was just one of those errors that got propagated endlessly.

Pluto, on the other hand, was a matter of changing the definition of a "planet" (the original definition by the ancient Greeks included the Sun and Moon). Pluto remains what it was beforehand, it's our labels that changed. I do think it doesn't belong in the same "bucket" as the eight currently recognized planets, but I also think those eight planets don't themselves belong in the same bucket as each other either; there are fundamental differences between gas giants and "terrestrial" planets far greater than between the terrestrials and Pluto. Once that rebucketing occurs, and we speak of terrestrials, asteroids, gas giants, and kuiper belt objects as separate classes of things, perhaps the word "planet" will be a sort of bucket for buckets, and we'll use it to group different classes of things that orbit stars together, and plutons will be included. Or maybe not. Scientists are all about classifying things they observe, and sometimes the classification scheme in use starts to break down. We've seen it in biology (where "kingdom" is no longer the top-level phylogenetic division, and many more levels have been established between things like class, order, and family), we're seeing it now in astronomy.


----------



## H. Jones (Jul 27, 2020)

dtaylor said:


> Well it looks like we have our answer:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'd like to see what the R5 does when it's not paired with a lens so old that it could legally order a drink in the US like they're using. The manual specifically states you don't get 12 FPS when using older glass, and from my experience with the EOS R, it also can prevent the high-speed viewfinder with incompatible glass.

The mark I 500mm f/4L IS they're using is from 1999. It's not even listed as compatible with the 12 FPS mode in the R5 manual, and I've seen no evidence of newer lenses or RF lenses having similar results to what they recorded, which is also on top of the fact the camera was already being forced to record the viewfinder feed on top of shooting images. Even if the EVF has a slight delay or slideshow effect, 12 FPS is going to look far better than what they were doing, and 20 FPS is going to look like a video feed on its own.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Once that rebucketing occurs, and we speak of terrestrials, asteroids, gas giants, and kuiper belt objects as separate classes of things, perhaps the word "planet" will be a sort of bucket for buckets, and we'll use it to group different classes of things that orbit stars together, and plutons will be included. Or maybe not. Scientists are all about classifying things they observe, and sometimes the classification scheme in use starts to break down. We've seen it in biology (where "kingdom" is no longer the top-level phylogenetic division, and many more levels have been established between things like class, order, and family), we're seeing it now in astronomy.


That gives new meaning to "bucket list."

My geneticist friend tells me that we have 23 pairs rather than 24 like other primates because two of the chromosomes "fused," whatever that means. (A great thing about living in a college town is that for almost any topic, I know someone with a PhD in that field, if not the specific topic, maybe somebody I normally play bridge with.) Back before he moved to a retirement home, I used to sit with him on his porch, and he would sometimes comment on the breeds of dogs people were walking. One day I saw a white dog with a black spot. He pointed out that it was really a black dog with a really large white spot.


----------



## steven_diexplora (Jul 27, 2020)

H. Jones said:


> I'd like to see what the R5 does when it's not paired with a lens so old that it could legally order a drink in the US like they're using. The manual specifically states you don't get 12 FPS when using older glass, and from my experience with the EOS R, it also can prevent the high-speed viewfinder with incompatible glass.
> 
> The mark I 500mm f/4L IS they're using is from 1999. It's not even listed as compatible with the 12 FPS mode in the R5 manual, and I've seen no evidence of newer lenses or RF lenses having similar results to what they recorded, which is also on top of the fact the camera was already being forced to record the viewfinder feed on top of shooting images. Even if the EVF has a slight delay or slideshow effect, 12 FPS is going to look far better than what they were doing, and 20 FPS is going to look like a video feed on its own.



I agree, hopefully they will do an update


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 28, 2020)

AlanF said:


> To be fair, I couldn't keep a bird in frame with a 2xTC on a 500mm L IS (first version) using a DSLR - too heavy and too narrow fov. Chelsea is quite a woman to manage that.


Hi Alan, I watch the video. It’s not that. the subject (bird) disappears from the viewfinder like for a for a few frames and reappear again... have a little watch. I expect that R6 with its 20Mp sensor and a lower res EVF will be better placed for tracking. I totally expect this.


----------



## acowfullofjoy (Jul 28, 2020)

I really hope the rumors aren't true. As a canon user, I feel really let down if the 5d MkIV will be the end of Canon's 5d range, it's almost like they've just stopped short of the top. I was really hoping that canon would have one final DSLR (that being the 5d MkV) that would compete with Nikon's 850D.

Personally at this stage, I'm not interested in mirrorless and I think it's really going to be "users choice", especially in the hobbyist/amateurs market. I understand that mirrorless is a game changer and it's going to be the way of the future, however there is a market for those of us who are happy with the DSLR's, whilst we go through this transitional stage. At present I think Nikon have the right market mix with the 850D and the mirrorless Z7. We all know that canon has created a game changer with the release of the 5R, however it would be fantastic if they could also do it with a DSLR Mk5.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 28, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Hi Alan, I watch the video. It’s not that. the subject (bird) disappears from the viewfinder like for a for a few frames and reappear again... have a little watch. I expect that R6 with its 20Mp sensor and a lower res EVF will be better placed for tracking. I totally expect this.


I had watched it, and was impressed with the way Chelsea could handle that heavy hunk of metal and glass - the lens, not Tony. The old 500/4 is not on Canon’s list of lens of compatible lenses for high fps.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 28, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I had watched it, and was impressed with the way Chelsea could handle that heavy hunk of metal and glass - the lens, not Tony. The old 500/4 is not on Canon’s list of lens of compatible lenses for high fps.


Yup, so does 400/2.8 IS II, the issue though was not a low FPS rate but EVF in high refresh mode dropping some frames in between.
Uh, I don’t know... it’s a bloody Tatts lotto. You pay $4000+ and keep your fingers crossed...
At this stage I would like to have a good read of R6 user manual. It isn’t available yet.
I also would like to understand how 20Mp R6 handles tracking of fast subjects. I am convinced that 20Mp sensor and lower EVF resolution in R6 will substantially improve EVF performance while tracking. And... battery life. Less data to write. less dots to display.
I am seriously thinking of R6 now as a junior 1 series camera. Sure not as well built, Not as well weather protected.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 28, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Yup, so does 400/2.8 IS II, the issue though was not a low FPS rate but EVF in high refresh mode dropping some frames in between.
> Uh, I don’t know... it’s a bloody Tatts lotto. You pay $4000+ and keep your fingers crossed...
> At this stage I would like to have a good read of R6 user manual. It isn’t available yet.
> I also would like to understand how 20Mp R6 handles tracking of fast subjects. I am convinced that 20Mp sensor and lower EVF resolution in R6 will substantially improve EVF performance while tracking. And... battery life. Less data to write. less dots to display.
> I am seriously thinking of R6 now as a junior 1 series camera. Sure not as well built, Not as well weather protected.


I think I've read somewhere, and please correct me if I am wrong, that the evf at lower frame rates appears to have no blackout because it is a slide show of the previous frames whereas at higher fps it is closer to real time, and the incompatible lenses restrict the camera to those lower fps?


----------



## AlanF (Jul 28, 2020)

stevelee said:


> That gives new meaning to "bucket list."
> 
> My geneticist friend tells me that we have 23 pairs rather than 24 like other primates because two of the chromosomes "fused," whatever that means. (A great thing about living in a college town is that for almost any topic, I know someone with a PhD in that field, if not the specific topic, maybe somebody I normally play bridge with.) Back before he moved to a retirement home, I used to sit with him on his porch, and he would sometimes comment on the breeds of dogs people were walking. One day I saw a white dog with a black spot. He pointed out that it was really a black dog with a really large white spot.


To use US phraseology, scientists can be divided into "lumpers" and "splitters". The splitters won for Pluto. At an early stage in my career, I was invited to lecture in a series of US college towns whose populations dropped by a factor of 5 during student vacations. An experienced British expat professor warned me at one it was because they were trying to recruit me, and his Mid-West school was a great place to do science because there was nothing else to do apart from watching the grass grow. I really enjoyed my post-doc and sabbatical years in the US, and wouldn't mind being there now with the current travel restrictions.


----------



## Fischer (Jul 28, 2020)

acowfullofjoy said:


> As a canon user, I feel really let down if the 5d MkIV will be the end of Canon's 5d range, it's almost like they've just stopped short of the top.



"The top" is a moveable target so nothing - ever - comes close or we would all still be shooting T90's.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 28, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I think I've read somewhere, and please correct me if I am wrong, that the evf at lower frame rates appears to have no blackout because it is a slide show of the previous frames whereas at higher fps it is closer to real time, and the incompatible lenses restrict the camera to those lower fps?


Um, not quite. It has been a great discussion on CR lately as to how the sensor readout, buffer, processing time and evf output are all parts that form the combined EVF latency. So it’s 20Mp worth of data vs 45Mp worth of data being red, processed for EVF output, buffered and finally fed into an EVF issue.
as far as I remember and I can be mistaken here, Canon choose to skip some frames - slide show effect - due to very slow readout of sensor used in the R.
I cannot remember who was the forum member that explained in great details the nature of the combined EVF latency. I hope that forum member will chime in and help us understand if my expectations of R6 being potentially a better Camera for tracking is correct.
I am very curious to review R6 user manual and compare some still photography related limitations of R5 vs R6


----------



## chik0240 (Jul 28, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I think I've read somewhere, and please correct me if I am wrong, that the evf at lower frame rates appears to have no blackout because it is a slide show of the previous frames whereas at higher fps it is closer to real time, and the incompatible lenses restrict the camera to those lower fps?


to be clear I didn't ever read that before, but maybe you are referring to the FPS of the shooting/photos to be taken per second, which is related to how the lens and camera communicate for focus, aperture closing etc. to work. but the EVF itself shouldn't drop as it don't make sense that a slower or unknown lens would affect how the sensor image was read out and displayed on the EVF, it makes sense though for a slower or incompatible lens cannot do 20 or even 12 photos per second as that is a chain of 
camera send focusing signal->lens react-> camera confirms focus -> tells the lens to stop down and fire shutter 
process would take more time for old lens


----------



## stevelee (Jul 28, 2020)

AlanF said:


> To use US phraseology, scientists can be divided into "lumpers" and "splitters". The splitters won for Pluto. At an early stage in my career, I was invited to lecture in a series of US college towns whose populations dropped by a factor of 5 during student vacations. An experienced British expat professor warned me at one it was because they were trying to recruit me, and his Mid-West school was a great place to do science because there was nothing else to do apart from watching the grass grow. I really enjoyed my post-doc and sabbatical years in the US, and wouldn't mind being there now with the current travel restrictions.


My friend did undergrad at NC State, masters at Cornell, doctorate at Georgia, post-doc at Oak Ridge, TN, and Riverside, CA. Then he taught for some years at the University of Calgary before coming here to chair the biology department, supervise pre-meds (of which there are relatively many), and be the liaison to med schools. So he had a rather wide range of experiences in the North American collegiate landscape. And his kids grew up playing hockey.

One of our scholarship basketball players, one of our best, was offered a free ride at medical school, but decided to go into the Catholic priesthood instead. Since academics come first, student's labs really mess up practice schedules. They built additional practice facilities to ease the crunch between various teams and working around the labs. Our best player in this century, Steph Curry, who later was a two-time NBA MVP, did so well in a freshman math course that his prof encouraged him to major in math. His roommate, also a player, did a double major in math and economics and has since got an MBA from Stanford. He now heads Steph's businesses for him. So it is fun to following the teams and players here even if you are not much of a sports fan.

In normal times there are too many things going on here to keep up with, unlike that Mid-West school. And if you run out of anything to do, the 16th largest city in the country is just over 20 miles away. The students are too busy to take in most of it, but us old folks stay entertained. I was going to sing in a performance of Beethoven's Ninth on campus in May. Obviously that didn't happen.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 28, 2020)

chik0240 said:


> to be clear I didn't ever read that before, but maybe you are referring to the FPS of the shooting/photos to be taken per second, which is related to how the lens and camera communicate for focus, aperture closing etc. to work. but the EVF itself shouldn't drop as it don't make sense that a slower or unknown lens would affect how the sensor image was read out and displayed on the EVF, it makes sense though for a slower or incompatible lens cannot do 20 or even 12 photos per second as that is a chain of
> camera send focusing signal->lens react-> camera confirms focus -> tells the lens to stop down and fire shutter
> process would take more time for old lens



Read on here that one issue with older lenses is how quickly stop down. So the lag is that the camera is waiting for the lens to stop the aperture back down. Looks like they were shooting at F8, 1/1000, ISO 200, +1/3 EV. On a 20 year old lens with a 2x. I definitely need another data point here as nobody else has mentioned EVF tracking performance.

Which is because every other reviewer is ignoring it shoots stills.


----------



## GiovanniB (Aug 26, 2020)

I hope you guys are wrong. Although DSLMs have certain advantages, I still prefer the optical pentaprism viewfinder. Please, Canon, give us a 5D Mk. V with the sensor and processor of the R5!

I have Sony DSLM and Canon DSLR full-frame equipment, and use some of the EF lenses also on Sony. The reason why I still have Canon equipment is that they offer DSLRs. If they go DSLM only, well, then I go Sony only because if I can't get any new DSLRs in the future and would be forced to use DSLM only, then I can stay with Sony DSLMs just as well.


----------



## cornieleous (Aug 26, 2020)

GiovanniB said:


> I hope you guys are wrong. Although DSLMs have certain advantages, I still prefer the optical pentaprism viewfinder. Please, Canon, give us a 5D Mk. V with the sensor and processor of the R5!
> 
> I have Sony DSLM and Canon DSLR full-frame equipment, and use some of the EF lenses also on Sony. The reason why I still have Canon equipment is that they offer DSLRs. If they go DSLM only, well, then I go Sony only because if I can't get any new DSLRs in the future and would be forced to use DSLM only, then I can stay with Sony DSLMs just as well.



That DSLM term drives me nuts in place of MILC. SLR was adapted to DSLR was adapted to DSLM and hardly has accurate meaning any more.

Anyhow, I am curious if you have tried one of the latest EVF? They look so much better than they used to. I was not a fan of EVF until I got the R5. I may have even wanted a true 5D5 if asked before this camera. Now after just a couple weeks the 5D4 isn't getting much use and I don't miss the OVF. In many conditions I can barely tell the difference from optical and the view is much superior for composing, seeing what exposure you will actually get, checking and setting focus, etc. In the dark, obviously an OVF is useless but an EVF tells you everything. Same with overly bright conditions like sunsets, the OVF gets flooded. The EVF on the R5 looks pretty natural, and has much more information available, is very configurable, and easier to see with less distortion and more apparent magnification. It takes workflow to a whole new level. The only place I am uncertain about it is in fast action or wildlife, and even then all reports are that it has minimal lag.

If you are bought into both Canon and Sony already, why would you go with Sony mirrorless without trying Canon? Just curious. When I make major decisions like which system I usually rent or demo things first.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 26, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Are you joking, or is there some reason why your opinion would hold more weight than a sourced assertion from Canon Rumors?


A CR2 is still a rumor and not a guarantee. Its impossible to prove a negative unless Canon comes out and says no more. Even then, they can change their mind. They said no M5 MK II, but now rumors say its happening. Buyer demand is the key.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Aug 26, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> A CR2 is still a rumor and not a guarantee. Its impossible to prove a negative unless Canon comes out and says no more. Even then, they can change their mind. They said no M5 MK II, but now rumors say its happening. Buyer demand is the key.



He doesn't need to prove a negative, but he does need to provide a logical basis for why his opinion on the matter should take precedence over this site's CR2 rumor, which was my point.


----------



## GiovanniB (Aug 26, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> If you are bought into both Canon and Sony already, why would you go with Sony mirrorless without trying Canon? Just curious.


When I purchased my first Sony body, the A7r (initial version), the purpose was to get better dynamic range for landscape photography than what was available from Canon at the time, while continue using the Canon EF lenses. After a trip to Italy I had been so disappointed by the DR limitations on pictures taken on sunny days with the 5D II that I purchased the A7r almost immediately. Multi-exposure HDR is no acceptable alternative for me. Meanwhile, I've somehow grown into the Sony system, having added a number of native lenses and using it almost exclusively. However, I continue to miss the optical viewfinder because I want to see the light the sensor sees (and hopefully captures as much as possible in RAW) but I have no desire to view - prior to exposure - whatever final result the camera's imaging pipeline suggests. One of the notable exceptions, where I actually prefer the EVF of course, is low-light photography. But this is a rather rare application for me, so I could live with live view on a (sorry) DSLR for that.

I have always been more than happy with the image quality captured with my Sony cameras. So, EVF aside, I have not much to complain about except for the confusing menus but they are improving now (A7s III fixes it) and at the end fo the day, Canon hides many of the settings which are bloating the Sony menus in their "custom functions" which are by no means intuitive either.

Also, as I noted I have a number of native (F)E mount lenses already, so switching to Canon R would mean to buy new lenses again. Adapting EF is always only the 2nd best solution, regardless if I adapt them to RF or FE. In the end everyone buys native lenses for their current system, and the manufacturers know it. Surely one of the reasons to introduce a new system in an otherwise saturated market.

I have tried a colleague's EOS R and certainly felt immediately familiar with it. I'm sure I would with the R5 too. However, nothing that makes enough difference to give up on Sony. If I'd really invest into another system and money was not be the limiting factor, it would not be Canon but maybe Fujifilm's GFX.

Therefore the only thing I'm asking here is to get a 5D Mk. V. I am not interested in the Canon R system.


----------



## cornieleous (Aug 26, 2020)

GiovanniB said:


> When I purchased my first Sony body, the A7r (initial version), the purpose was to get better dynamic range for landscape photography than what was available from Canon at the time, while continue using the Canon EF lenses. After a trip to Italy I had been so disappointed by the DR limitations on pictures taken on sunny days with the 5D II that I purchased the A7r almost immediately. Multi-exposure HDR is no acceptable alternative for me. Meanwhile, I've somehow grown into the Sony system, having added a number of native lenses and using it almost exclusively. However, I continue to miss the optical viewfinder because I want to see the light the sensor sees (and hopefully captures as much as possible in RAW) but I have no desire to view - prior to exposure - whatever final result the camera's imaging pipeline suggests. One of the notable exceptions, where I actually prefer the EVF of course, is low-light photography. But this is a rather rare application for me, so I could live with live view on a (sorry) DSLR for that.
> 
> I have always been more than happy with the image quality captured with my Sony cameras. So, EVF aside, I have not much to complain about except for the confusing menus but they are improving now (A7s III fixes it) and at the end fo the day, Canon hides many of the settings which are bloating the Sony menus in their "custom functions" which are by no means intuitive either.
> 
> ...




Fair enough and thanks for answering, I was just curious. Sounds like you have a lot of Sony glass. To me the R5 is miles better than the R, especially the EVF, and maybe the best photo mirrorless out right now, plus EF glass on it performs better than it did on my 5D4 and only requires inexpensive adapter- I see no hurry to rush to buy RF glass when the EF glass is performing better than on any native camera I have. From what I know the Sony adapted EF is not always as good and that is why native Sony is best on their bodies, but seems not to be the case for Canon adapted EF on R5, which is excellent. For myself, since Canon image quality is finally caught up or leading and I prefer their systems, I like that I can shoot the 5D4 as second cam with the same batteries and lenses as R5.

I'll be happy if Canon answers your wishes too as it would be another option, but after using the R5 I am just not sure the OVF makes much sense anymore and I would never have thought I'd be a mirrorless convert until using it for several weeks. The new EVF vs old ones like in the R or last gen Sony is so different and better in almost any light conditions.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 26, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> Fair enough and thanks for answering, I was just curious. Sounds like you have a lot of Sony glass. To me the R5 is miles better than the R, especially the EVF, and maybe the best photo mirrorless out right now, plus EF glass on it performs better than it did on my 5D4 and only requires inexpensive adapter- I see no hurry to rush to buy RF glass when the EF glass is performing better than on any native camera I have. From what I know the Sony adapted EF is not always as good and that is why native Sony is best on their bodies, but seems not to be the case for Canon adapted EF on R5, which is excellent. For myself, since Canon image quality is finally caught up or leading and I prefer their systems, I like that I can shoot the 5D4 as second cam with the same batteries and lenses as R5.
> 
> I'll be happy if Canon answers your wishes too as it would be another option, but after using the R5 I am just not sure the OVF makes much sense anymore and I would never have thought I'd be a mirrorless convert until using it for several weeks. The new EVF vs old ones like in the R or last gen Sony is so different and better in almost any light conditions.



As I see it now, the only legitimate complaint about an EVF _qua EVF_ (as opposed to just complaining about a _low quality_ or _older_ EVF) is that it does burn battery. But if someone has used an R5 (or R6) and still doesn't like the EVF for some _other_ reason than the battery drain, I await correction. (And I suppose it also depends on the 60 vs 120 p modes of the EVF. I just left mine in whatever state the camera ships; I should probably put that setting in my custom menus.)


----------



## Maru (Aug 26, 2020)

GiovanniB said:


> I hope you guys are wrong. Although DSLMs have certain advantages, I still prefer the optical pentaprism viewfinder. Please, Canon, give us a 5D Mk. V with the sensor and processor of the R5!
> 
> I have Sony DSLM and Canon DSLR full-frame equipment, and use some of the EF lenses also on Sony. The reason why I still have Canon equipment is that they offer DSLRs. If they go DSLM only, well, then I go Sony only because if I can't get any new DSLRs in the future and would be forced to use DSLM only, then I can stay with Sony DSLMs just as well.


Does Tamron lenses work well with Sony A7rIII ...like 100-400 ! or there are limitations if you buy NonSony lens...


----------



## stevelee (Aug 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> As I see it now, the only legitimate complaint about an EVF _qua EVF_ (as opposed to just complaining about a _low quality_ or _older_ EVF) is that it does burn battery.


I guess it depends upon your idea of _"qua EVF." _ I think it is legitimate to prefer having an OVF.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 27, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I guess it depends upon your idea of _"qua EVF." _ I think it is legitimate to prefer having an OVF.



What, specifically, about the R5 EVF is worse than an OVF? Before the R5, I know there were legit functional grips like blackout and lag and battery power. As far as I can tell the only one of those that remains is battery power. Now if you're thinking just a matter of personal taste, that's different from a "complaint" but if there's an actual disadvantage...that's what I was looking to find out.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 27, 2020)

SteveC said:


> What, specifically, about the R5 EVF is worse than an OVF? Before the R5, I know there were legit functional grips like blackout and lag and battery power. As far as I can tell the only one of those that remains is battery power. Now if you're thinking just a matter of personal taste, that's different from a "complaint" but if there's an actual disadvantage...that's what I was looking to find out.


Really, what I mean is personal taste. So it's not like there is some technical tweak they could do to the EVF to suit me. I don't do fast action or need long battery life, so the OVF is not really going to make a real difference I can think of for my picture taking. I prefer spinach to turnip greens. Someone might suggest that is not a legitimate preference. I haven't read the specs as to which is superior, and doubt it would make a difference if I did. If people like and want to eat turnip greens, I have no problem with that and no desire to convert them.

My only extended experience with an EVF is the popup one on my G5X II. The adjustment on it is so fussy that I doubt I have the diopter quite right for my left eye. But it is good enough for composing the picture when it is too sunny to get a good look on the screen. I'm thankful it is there for when I need it. I briefly looked through the viewfinder of the M50 in the store. It seemed nice. I assume the viewfinders on the R cameras are at least as good.

It doesn't bother me that people use these cameras. I feel no urge to convert anyone or have them involuntarily treated for catoptrophobia, spectrophobia, or eisoptrophobia, as the case may be.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 28, 2020)

stevelee said:


> Really, what I mean is personal taste. So it's not like there is some technical tweak they could do to the EVF to suit me. I don't do fast action or need long battery life, so the OVF is not really going to make a real difference I can think of for my picture taking. I prefer spinach to turnip greens. Someone might suggest that is not a legitimate preference. I haven't read the specs as to which is superior, and doubt it would make a difference if I did. If people like and want to eat turnip greens, I have no problem with that and no desire to convert them.
> 
> My only extended experience with an EVF is the popup one on my G5X II. The adjustment on it is so fussy that I doubt I have the diopter quite right for my left eye. But it is good enough for composing the picture when it is too sunny to get a good look on the screen. I'm thankful it is there for when I need it. I briefly looked through the viewfinder of the M50 in the store. It seemed nice. I assume the viewfinders on the R cameras are at least as good.
> 
> It doesn't bother me that people use these cameras. I feel no urge to convert anyone or have them involuntarily treated for catoptrophobia, spectrophobia, or eisoptrophobia, as the case may be.



Personal taste inherently cannot be argued with, and I wasn't trying to. I was addressing technical/usability issues that people used to bring up (but don't any more). Because, apparently, most of the reasons not having to do with personal taste, are finally gone.


----------



## Seamus56 (Aug 28, 2020)

For me, the question is about affordability. I have shot Canon cameras since 1978 and have quite a few EF lenses. While I have an EOS R with the RF 24-105L lens and the RF 35 Macro Lens, I also have a 5DS, 6D Mark II and 7D Mark II. The R camera and lenses are great, but I am not sure they are that much better than the EF system that I already have. When every lens you need in the RF line costs 2k or more, you really need to want the new system. At 2.5K, even the 5D Mark IV is about $500 more than what it really should be. If Canon released a 5D Mark V, how high could they price it? I doubt it could be sold for anything more than 3k. So eventually we will all be adapting our EF glass to the R series. It could be worse, like when we left our beloved F-1 AE and FD lens collection behind.


----------



## Seamus56 (Aug 28, 2020)

infared said:


> How well does EF glass "actually" perform on an R5?


Substantially the same as on native bodies.


----------



## chik0240 (Aug 28, 2020)

I think the EVF drawback in battery and feel of unrealistic is one side, personally I can see and feel it's pixels and feels disconnected to the scene is another.

One more major consideration hindering me from investing in the MILC system is durability, during the course of regularly using my 5D 3 since it's released despite I never took video, there are more stuck pixels over time of 8 years, the MILC inevitably uses the CMOS and other stuffs much more often than a DSLR, plus it's tracking means continuously use the AF motor and IS module, I am ok to spend some $10k in gears that serves 10+ years, but if the CMOS breaks down every 5-6 years and lens turned into junk once the AF motor is broken (manual coupling vs focus by wire) I am a bit skeptic especially on investing even more than the 5D system back then


----------



## Avenger 2.0 (Aug 28, 2020)

chik0240 said:


> I think the EVF drawback in battery and feel of unrealistic is one side, personally I can see and feel it's pixels and feels disconnected to the scene is another.
> 
> One more major consideration hindering me from investing in the MILC system is durability, during the course of regularly using my 5D 3 since it's released despite I never took video, there are more stuck pixels over time of 8 years, the MILC inevitably uses the CMOS and other stuffs much more often than a DSLR, plus it's tracking means continuously use the AF motor and IS module, I am ok to spend some $10k in gears that serves 10+ years, but if the CMOS breaks down every 5-6 years and lens turned into junk once the AF motor is broken (manual coupling vs focus by wire) I am a bit skeptic especially on investing even more than the 5D system back then


Indeed. And it's almost impossible now to repair yourself the new body's and lenses. The design is so complicated and everything is linked together in firmware replacing something other then a button or flex cable is impossible.


----------



## Soren Hakanlind (Sep 16, 2020)

Sad, sad, sad! Don't like the electronic viewfinder in the R at all. Advanced autofocus is for amateurs! No sport in handling the gear left. I'm still waiting for the 5Dm5! Or maybe I buy another new 5Dm4 if they don't release it. 5Dm4 is a fantastic camera!


----------



## SteveC (Sep 16, 2020)

Soren Hakanlind said:


> Sad, sad, sad! Don't like the electronic viewfinder in the R at all. Advanced autofocus is for amateurs! No sport in handling the gear left. I'm still waiting for the 5Dm5! Or maybe I buy another new 5Dm4 if they don't release it. 5Dm4 is a fantastic camera!



You might like the EVF in the R5 or R6 better. They apparently have greatly improved it.


----------



## Maru (Sep 16, 2020)

Soren Hakanlind said:


> Sad, sad, sad! Don't like the electronic viewfinder in the R at all. Advanced autofocus is for amateurs! No sport in handling the gear left. I'm still waiting for the 5Dm5! Or maybe I buy another new 5Dm4 if they don't release it. 5Dm4 is a fantastic camera!



EOS R gives all 5D mkIV feature for around $700 discount without few buttons and EVF...thats how they saved $700


----------



## amazin (Sep 18, 2020)

We should all forget about a new 5D. 
With no more new EF lenses in development there is no way the EOS D EF mount body line will have a future.
The EF line has more than 30 years now, following the FD line. And now is the RF one.

There is less and less cameras sellings worldwide due to the improvements of cameras in smartphones. Dont forget that.

So no one should expect a replacement for the 5d4 other than the R5.

I hear the worries about the EVF. I tried the EVF on the R5 and i'm sure it will make me forget the 5D3 fast.


----------



## Tugela (Sep 26, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I think they are even less likely. The XXXD and XXXXD bodies are still huge compared to a mirrorless and who wants to bring something that looks 'old' out on vacation when this mirrorless has a touch to focus screen and no viewfinder?



DSLRs are tanking hard. That is why Canon are not doing anything more with them, the market for them is evaporating fast. In Japan they are down to ~21% of the ILC market, lol.



http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-202007_e.pdf


----------



## stevelee (Sep 26, 2020)

My 6D2 should last me for probably as many years as I have left, and I don't miss anything it doesn't do. If the 5D V came out, I probably wouldn't buy it. I was tempted to get a 5D IV when it was on sale a few months ago. If it had a flippy screen, I would have ordered it with no hesitation. If I get one, I will still use the 6D2 when I want to use that feature, but use the 5D IV almost all the time when I want to use the OVF. If I'm solvent when they have another sale I'll probably want to get one while I can.

I did consider getting an M50 when I was getting a new travel camera, but chose to go with the G5X II instead, based on my good experience with the G7X II and its pocket size. It has a popup EVF for when it is too bright out to use the screen. That's as close as I have come, or am likely to come, to getting a mirrorless camera with interchangeable lenses. The fast lens on the G5X II has enough focal length range for my travel pictures, except occasionally on the wide end. If I am in close quarters in an interior or am shooting a vast vista and need something wider than its 24mm equivalent, I'll do some shots to make a panorama in Photoshop.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 26, 2020)

I am enjoying my R5 at least as much as my DSLRs. For the first time ever using mirrorless for me, it's giving great battery life - some 1500 shots using my 100-400mm II on a full charge for my first serious longer sessions of shooting - more than I have ever got on my 5DIV or 5DSR. Admittedly, I have been shooting short bursts, which is energy efficient, and I use the EVF with the rear screen off, folded into the backed.


----------



## mpmark (Oct 5, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I went shooting the other day with the EOS R and the 5DSR. Using the 5DSR again after adapting to mirrorless was like going back to the stone age. I know there are plenty of people who love DSLRs, but no-way I'd ever go back to using one as my primary camera again.



good for you, i dont feel the way you do, I have the eosr and 5div, I still prefer my ovf when shooting wildlife, I can use my camera as a spotting scope and not eat battery as I enjoy watching the subject through the lens, in real time and no lag all day long.


----------



## jolyonralph (Oct 6, 2020)

mpmark said:


> good for you, i dont feel the way you do, I have the eosr and 5div, I still prefer my ovf when shooting wildlife, I can use my camera as a spotting scope and not eat battery as I enjoy watching the subject through the lens, in real time and no lag all day long.



Absolutely! If I were primarily a wildlife shooter I'm sure I'd think the same way.


----------



## Methodical (Oct 12, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> I went shooting the other day with the EOS R and the 5DSR. Using the 5DSR again after adapting to mirrorless was like going back to the stone age. I know there are plenty of people who love DSLRs, but no-way I'd ever go back to using one as my primary camera again.



What was it that made it seem like the stone ages? Curious...


----------



## Maru (Oct 12, 2020)

Methodical said:


> What was it that made it seem like the stone ages? Curious...


I was thinking that too actually.. 5dsR is an excellent camera with some significant ISO noise ...apart from that it's an excellent camera i feel ..I hope they would have fixed the ISO


----------



## MartinF. (Oct 12, 2020)

There might (sadly) not be an 5DmkV, as a direct successor from the 5D mkIV. But with a brand new 1DX mkIII and some new (2019) versions of EF lenses (70-200 mk III) I guess that there will be at least one more final DSRL. - At bit like the the T90 the last FD mount camera from 1990 three years after the introduction of the EOS camera line and EF mount. Or the EOS 1V - Canons last SLR film camera, introduced in 2000 and continued in production until 2010. 
So the rumored death of the 5D line might be right. But my guess is that there will be one more "prof/semiprof" DSLR for the current 5D segment. 
But that will be the end of EF mount cameras.
- Anyway: I just bought a brand new 5D mkIV to take over from my 5D and 6D. To keep me within the DSLR and EF mount world for the next at least 5-6 years. 
Mirrorless is the furture no doubt. DSLR will be as rare as film cameras are today. And that is just fine. Personally I will stay with the DSLR as long as possible. Going mirrorless might earlier, but with a much smaller system (or fixed lens camera) that the current "R series")


----------



## jolyonralph (Oct 12, 2020)

Methodical said:


> What was it that made it seem like the stone ages? Curious...



Several things. The focus accuracy, the lack of immediate visual feedback in the viewfinder as to whether things are under/overexposed, the weight and size (to a small extent). But the main thing was being unable to review images easily outdoors in daylight. Reviewing images through the viewfinder is such a revelation after being used to trying to run to a shady patch to try and see what they look like on the rear screen.

After being used to the early EOS M cameras it was the main reason I didn't buy a 5D Mark IV to replace my Mark III and went for a Sony A7RII instead. Now I'm back with the EOS R having fortunately not invested much on the Sony system.


----------



## Methodical (Oct 13, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> Several things. The focus accuracy, the lack of immediate visual feedback in the viewfinder as to whether things are under/overexposed, the weight and size (to a small extent). But the main thing was being unable to review images easily outdoors in daylight. Reviewing images through the viewfinder is such a revelation after being used to trying to run to a shady patch to try and see what they look like on the rear screen.
> 
> After being used to the early EOS M cameras it was the main reason I didn't buy a 5D Mark IV to replace my Mark III and went for a Sony A7RII instead. Now I'm back with the EOS R having fortunately not invested much on the Sony system.



I see. Thanks. 

I just recenty received the R5, but have not been able to shoot with it yet. I have been waiting for the EF-R adapter and it came in today, but someone took out the adapter and put a Canon battery charger in the box...damn shiiisters. I patiently waited 2 weeks for the thing to come in and still am not able to shoot with the R5 yet. Fortunately, I found a standard adapter at a local Best Buy, but now it's dark. So, hopefully, I will be able to shoot with it tomorrow and see what you describe.


----------



## Maru (Oct 13, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> Several things. The focus accuracy, the lack of immediate visual feedback in the viewfinder as to whether things are under/overexposed, the weight and size (to a small extent). But the main thing was being unable to review images easily outdoors in daylight. Reviewing images through the viewfinder is such a revelation after being used to trying to run to a shady patch to try and see what they look like on the rear screen.
> 
> After being used to the early EOS M cameras it was the main reason I didn't buy a 5D Mark IV to replace my Mark III and went for a Sony A7RII instead. Now I'm back with the EOS R having fortunately not invested much on the Sony system.


What did you see wrong in Sony.. curious to know the advantages of EOS R!


----------



## vscd (Oct 14, 2020)

@Moderators

So.... as a EOS R5 came out skip the "Rumours-Source". It's not worth it


----------



## jolyonralph (Oct 14, 2020)

Maru said:


> What did you see wrong in Sony.. curious to know the advantages of EOS R!



To be honest, very little wrong! I still have the A7RII (although it's a bit battered now) and will keep it as I have an underwater case for it. I didn't invest much in lenses, but the 55mm FE 1.8 is a fantastic lens and I'd keep the sony just to use that. It is nicely smaller than the EOS R, so with the 35mm 2.8 lens I can keep it in a coat pocket. 

However, there was little point in me replacing my investment of EF glass with Sony glass, and in general I much prefer the EOS R to the Sony.


----------



## Rzrsharp (Oct 15, 2020)

Methodical said:


> What was it that made it seem like the stone ages? Curious...



The world turns into stone-age after move our eyes from EVF?


----------



## Maru (Oct 15, 2020)

Now canon is pushing for 5dsR refub at 1199... I hope they push something for 5dmkIV like that ...


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 15, 2020)

Methodical said:


> What was it that made it seem like the stone ages? Curious...


I'd say AF precision and consistency is the biggest improvement of the R over the 5DIV, particularly at wide apertures. 

The other big step up is with exposure. The EVF is so good at showing exactly what the captured exposure will be that it frees up fingers and mind to compose more easily and to nail desired exposure exactly. EXACTLY. By using spot AF, moving the spot zone slowly over different parts of, say, a person's face, the shadow/highlight balance can be locked in with AE LOCK HOLD (H*). 

"Stone age" might be a rhetorical flourish, but "paradigm shift" is not much of an exaggeration at all. Seriously. Photographers with years of experience might already be nailing exposure consistently, and they might be satisfied with AF. (BUT, until you see the AF improvement of Canon's mirrorless, you just can't understand how much better it is.) Newer photographers, however, don't have as steep a learning curve, and can start capturing and creating faster than before. Much faster, I believe.

This is why some of us who have made the move to mirrorless are so very enthusiastic. Hopefully not to the level of crusading, but definitely stoked!

See? I'm this excited with just the R. And still patiently waiting for an R5!


----------



## Maru (Oct 15, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I'd say AF precision and consistency is the biggest improvement of the R over the 5DIV, particularly at wide apertures.
> 
> The other big step up is with exposure. The EVF is so good at showing exactly what the captured exposure will be that it frees up fingers and mind to compose more easily and to nail desired exposure exactly. EXACTLY. By using spot AF, moving the spot zone slowly over different parts of, say, a person's face, the shadow/highlight balance can be locked in with AE LOCK HOLD (H*).
> 
> ...


Agreed with your point... just R5 is out of my zone..may be 10 years from now when they give 50% discount  ..but R is excellent at current price tag and with all the firmware updates


----------



## Easer (Nov 2, 2020)

My dream camera would have a huge, clumpsy and heavy (but equally amazing) optical viewfinder, preferrably an 100% 0.95x super-bulky one, with one of these matte-screens that show EXACTLY what is in focus, and nothing else.
Apart from thát; 50 mpix, a pretty good iso 1600 and a useable 3200, as high a dynamic range as possible, and the same with the buffer, a usb 3.2 connection and a 6 or 7" screen on the back, which can be done by exchanging the rear wheel with one that go into the camera, like the one by the index finger.

-Now, thát would be a camera....!!!

Electronic viewfinder R5, no effin way, if needed, I have the rear screen for whatever an electronic viewfinder does better than an optical viewfinder, what.the.heck.are.you.thinking.canon.....???
-With the 1D and 5D lines of cameras, You are basically market leaders, and You are throwing it all away, just to cater for teenagers who are used to use the screen on their phones as viewfinders, and who doesn't know better....???!?!!!?!?!?!!?!!!

An EVF may make sense with the crop-cameras, which basically has a useless small OVF, but in my pro camera I will want to be able to see the ultra-fine small changes in expression that make the perfect portrait in the viewfinder, thát is my job and my art, and if I can't see those due to whatever being in focus being plastered into some sort of highlighting, I won't get the picture....

Sure, I can deselect the plastering, but then I have a lot of dots to look at, rather than the real life that I love to depict, or in other words, I don´t want to see a finished jpg inside the viewfinder either, I want to see the real-life tones that there is, and which I know that I can get out perfectly in ACR and Photoshop.
-And I take basically all my pictures at f/1.0/1.2/1.4, so I coulden't care less for "being able to see the actual DoF", I got thát in my optical viewfinder already....

My 5D3 is getting old, and getting a 3 years old "new" camera (5D4/5DS) isn't quite going to cut it, I COULD get the 1Dx3, but then I am stuck at 20 mp, which is what I got now, and I WOULD like to have some more.
-Hmmm, both Nikon and Zeiss make a nice 35, 50 and 85 mm, which is basically all that I need, I wonder what Nikon and Sony got to offer camera-wise, I will go and take a look at it right now....


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 2, 2020)

Easer said:


> -And I take basically all my pictures at f/1.0/1.2/1.4, so I coulden't care less for "being able to see the actual DoF", I got thát in my optical viewfinder already....


I think this has been pointed out before, but unless you have a third party specialist screen fitted to your 5DIII then you sure ain’t seeing the 1.0 1.2 or 1.4 DOF 

But still, bring on a 5DV ! (Preferably with user interchangeable screens)


----------



## Maru (Nov 2, 2020)

somehow I feel there wont be much discount on good camera's this year during holidays as companies/stores are struggling in covid..thoughts!


----------



## SteveC (Nov 2, 2020)

Maru said:


> somehow I feel there wont be much discount on good camera's this year during holidays as companies/stores are struggling in covid..thoughts!



I certainly wouldn't expect much if any discount on the R5 as they already cannot keep up with demand.


----------



## Maru (Nov 2, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I certainly wouldn't expect much if any discount on the R5 as they already cannot keep up with demand.


Yeah..i was looking for eosR deal...i think R5/R6 needs a year before discount


----------



## ColorBlindBat (Nov 3, 2020)

Maru said:


> Yeah..i was looking for eosR deal...i think R5/R6 needs a year before discount



Check at CanonPriceWatch. They had the R with RF 24-105L for $2299 in September and $2249 in July from Canon authorized dealers with no tax.

They have also had just the bodies at different times. Most of the deals are pretty short lived, so you need to check relatively often.

Quite a bit cheaper than $2899 plus tax.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 3, 2020)

Maru said:


> Yeah..i was looking for eosR deal...i think R5/R6 needs a year before discount


I had a $200 discount on mine last month. R6's were $150 off. I expect discounts in the form of free printers, memory cards and bundled lenses as Christmas looms. Production is going full tilt by now and will catchup with demand soon.

Discounts are available if you happen to have a EPP that includes Canon


----------



## GiovanniB (Nov 7, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> But still, bring on a 5DV !


 Please! With:

Sensor same as R5 (with good dynamic range!)
4K video without recording time limit
Tiltable or flip-out screen
Perhaps slightly smaller than the Mk. IV
No compromise on the optical viewfinder!


----------



## Michael Clark (Nov 23, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I had a $200 discount on mine last month. R6's were $150 off. I expect discounts in the form of free printers, memory cards and bundled lenses as Christmas looms. Production is going full tilt by now and will catchup with demand soon.
> 
> Discounts are available if you happen to have a EPP that includes Canon
> 
> ...



EPP?


----------



## Ozarker (Nov 23, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I'd say AF precision and consistency is the biggest improvement of the R over the 5DIV, particularly at wide apertures.
> 
> The other big step up is with exposure. The EVF is so good at showing exactly what the captured exposure will be that it frees up fingers and mind to compose more easily and to nail desired exposure exactly. EXACTLY. By using spot AF, moving the spot zone slowly over different parts of, say, a person's face, the shadow/highlight balance can be locked in with AE LOCK HOLD (H*).
> 
> ...


I have got to learn to use AE LOCK HOLD (H*). Excited every time I read about someone using it, but never have. Thanks!


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 23, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I have got to learn to use AE LOCK HOLD (H*). Excited every time I read about someone using it, but never have. Thanks!


I can't even remember where I learned about it--it might have been six or seven years ago from a Rudy Winston video on Canon's website. It could have been at my old camera club...Or it might have been at one of the only seminars I've attended: Arthur Morris when he was still a Canon Explorer of Light.

But, wow, did it improve things when I was using the 5DIII and the 5DIV, because I rely on Spot Metering so much. Get the right exposure, lock it in, fire away with any composition. And then along comes the EVF, where I no longer had to rely on hoping that I metered the right spot, but could see the exposure and make fine adjustments just by slightly shifting where the spot is placed.

Strangely, I don't think the User Guides even mention H* anymore except in tables at the end of the e-booklet. I only found it in the R, R5, and R6 user guides by doing a search.


----------



## Ozarker (Nov 23, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I can't even remember where I learned about it--it might have been six or seven years ago from a Rudy Winston video on Canon's website. It could have been at my old camera club...Or it might have been at one of the only seminars I've attended: Arthur Morris when he was still a Canon Explorer of Light.
> 
> But, wow, did it improve things when I was using the 5DIII and the 5DIV, because I rely on Spot Metering so much. Get the right exposure, lock it in, fire away with any composition. And then along comes the EVF, where I no longer had to rely on hoping that I metered the right spot, but could see the exposure and make fine adjustments just by slightly shifting where the spot is placed.
> 
> Strangely, I don't think the User Guides even mention H* anymore except in tables at the end of the e-booklet. I only found it in the R, R5, and R6 user guides by doing a search.


I almost exclusively spot meter. Might be useful to me. There just is not much for me to shoot right now. The grandson (3.5 years old) is just now starting to ham it up a little. Very little. Honestly cannot wait for the pandemic to be over.


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 23, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I almost exclusively spot meter. Might be useful to me. There just is not much for me to shoot right now. The grandson (3.5 years old) is just now starting to ham it up a little. Very little. Honestly cannot wait for the pandemic to be over.


I hear you! Same here. My wife and I had actually converted our master bedroom into a portrait studio this year in February. (Now we sleep in a little in-law suite.) I tiled, painted, mounted backdrop racks and a boom arm, got a few stools and a tiny settee for posing. I even had clientele who wanted traditional formal portraits to supplement location lifestyle...And then came the pandemic and masks on everybody.

(I do believe our Creator has the best comic timing in the universe! But I am very aware that many people have suffered terribly from the actual effects of Covid-19, and the hyped-hysteria and anxiety. It's just how ironic it felt to have put in the work--and then portrait photography effectively put on a global pause. Don't we all personalize big events to some extent some of the time?)

But there is hope with the vaccines, etc. And just Saturday we went for a walk around the local college campus and were allowed to enter the stadium. Lots of people climbing the stairs for exercise, or checking out the fake "fans" in the seats. And then I started talking to a security guard. He told me very proudly that his daughter had just passed her bar exam on the first try. We were in the shade of an overhang, but the bright light from the field shone beautiful light on his face, and so I asked to take his photo. He hesitated a moment, but I just told him how great he looked, and that I would not post the image anywhere. My kids and wife were waiting for me. He smiled and agreed, so I offered him my email address for a copy of the photo, which, by the way, came out great! And he wrote to me last night asking for it.

I had on my mask to take the photo, but, using a 70-200mm, I was back far enough for us both to feel comfortable. He lowered his mask and I took the shot.

A word here about the R6. I had been experimenting Saturday with Fv mode. I was just starting to get the hang of it, but while chatting had forgotten about it. My shutter speed was set at 1/640th, and though my aperture was at f/3.5, because of the shade we were in, and the spot meter reading, the ISO had shot up to 4000. With the R or 5DIV, this would have been barely usable, but with the R6 it cleaned up beautifully with just a touch of noise reduction in LR CC, and I got a very pleasing shot of a man beaming with pride as he thought of his daughter, the new lawyer.

Ok! Enough of my stories! Hang in there!


----------



## stevelee (Nov 25, 2020)

We are welcome on the campus near me as long as we wear masks, keep our distance, and stay out of buildings. However people have seen a bear on the cross-country trails, so I'm not inclined to wander through the woods.


----------



## Timo2020 (Nov 27, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> CR2, people.
> 
> I still think a 5D5 is happening.
> 
> - A




I hope you are right! When I see the sales numbers DSLR versus mirrorless, one thing pops into my eye. Last year, Canon sold around 4.15 million cameras. Only 940,000 of them were mirrorless. That is about 20%. So, the cash-cows are still the DSLR cameras. Here is a link:









Here's How Many DSLRs and Mirrorless Cameras Top Brands Shipped in 2019


There are some new numbers out that give us an idea of how the top brands in the camera industry did in 2019 in terms of DSLR and mirrorless camera




petapixel.com





In addition to that, the EOS 5D Mark IV is the most popular DSLR camera in 2019. Canon's mirrorless camera(s) are in the third rang behind two Sony cameras. If that is the future, good luck Canon. Here is the link:









Results Are In: The Most Popular Cameras of 2019


Did anybody purchase an old school DSLR this year? Could the iPhone 11 have affected camera sales? It’s that time of year again when we gather all the stats and crown the winners and losers of the camera market. This year saw an unfortunate lack of sales, which have been shrinking for the past...




fstoppers.com





I need to upgrade my camera system. I use EOS cameras since 1995. I began with the EOS 500, upgraded to the wonderful EOS 5 (eye controlled, which I still miss), and I used for some time the EOS 3 - all back in Germany. I do not want to buy an older EOS 5D Mark IV model. And if there is no EOS 5D Mark V anymore, I would need to switch to another camera system. But then, I would either buy a Nikon system - rumors say the Nikon D880 (replaced the D850) will come 2021 - or I will switch to a mirrorless Sony camera system. Sorry Canon, it was a wonderful experience with you!

For me it is surprising, that Nikon goes in both directions, DSLR and mirrorless. While the world-leader Canon will give up on their most successful camera and goes in that very important market sector only mirrorless? I don't understand this. This is economically totally illogically. Because, which camera (system) shall bring Canon the money? Canon lost already thousands of true customers so far. And there will be more who will leave.


----------



## Maru (Dec 6, 2020)

How do you look at current 5dmkIV refub price of $1750..is this a good deal!


----------



## Timo2020 (Dec 8, 2020)

It depends! If you get a new 5D Mark IV that was only send back, but is technically okay, yes, it is a great deal. But when you go to the Canon homepage read the reviews, you will at least find one complain that the buyer got a 5D Mark IV with a shutter count of 9000!!! That is not refurbished anymore as we understand it. That thing is heavily used! Then the price of $1750 is much to high. If you want a used one check Adorama or KEH out. They have always very good deals.


----------



## Maru (Dec 8, 2020)

Timo2020 said:


> It depends! If you get a new 5D Mark IV that was only send back, but is technically okay, yes, it is a great deal. But when you go to the Canon homepage read the reviews, you will at least find one complain that the buyer got a 5D Mark IV with a shutter count of 9000!!! That is not refurbished anymore as we understand it. That thing is heavily used! Then the price of $1750 is much to high. If you want a used one check Adorama or KEH out. They have always very good deals.


Thank you...Yes my 7d was was refub from Canon with around 8k shutter {first one was 20k and had to fight a lot}


----------

