# The Canon EOS R5 will have an SD & CFExpress slot [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 28, 2020)

> One of the big questions about the upcoming Canon EOS R5, is what two card slots the camera will have. We have been told by a very good source that the Canon EOS R5 will have the following slots.
> 
> CFExpress
> SD UHS-II
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## addola (Feb 28, 2020)

Of course! The SD cards are cheaper! I think they would do a dual CFExpress on the 1D X mirrorless equivalent (the R1?).


----------



## Mark3794 (Feb 28, 2020)

Sounds great, double CFExpress would be really expensive for users


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Feb 28, 2020)

Do you think there's a chance we'll see an extension grip for the R5 as the RP has the EG-E1? Thanks.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Feb 28, 2020)

certainly makes the camera more affordable. Everyone's got sd cards lying about.



yoms said:


> Do you think there's a chance we'll see an extension grip for the R5 as the RP has the EG-E1? Thanks.



I think there is a great chance that Canon will produce a grip for the R5. They make grips for most of their larger body lineup.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

So it is a single slot camera with a useless SD slot for absolute last resort moments.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

addola said:


> Of course! The SD cards are cheaper! I think they would do a dual CFExpress on the 1D X mirrorless equivalent (the R1?).


The 1DxIII has two slots so I would not expect a downgrade.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> So it is a single slot camera with a useless SD slot for absolute last resort moments.



why is a UHS-II SD slot suddenly useless?


----------



## unfocused (Feb 28, 2020)

yoms said:


> Do you think there's a chance we'll see an extension grip for the R5 as the RP has the EG-E1? Thanks.


More likely a BG-E22 type grip. Would be great if it used the same grip.


----------



## Tom W (Feb 28, 2020)

So you'll probably give up a bit of speed when using the SD UHS-II compared to the CFExpress, but that's still a pretty doggone fast card. 

I would suspect that it would be backwards compatible with UHS-I SD cards as well, albeit at a more reduced buffer clearing speed.


----------



## Quackator (Feb 28, 2020)

Only logical to ease (back) people into their ecosystem.
Buying resistance lowered.

Technological war machine. The R5 surely is.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 28, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> why is a UHS-II SD slot suddenly useless?


He's just trolling. And, UHS II is not the same as UHS I.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> why is a UHS-II SD slot suddenly useless?


When was it ever useful? We had CF, CFast, and XQD before CFE.


----------



## tarjei99 (Feb 28, 2020)

People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.



Aye, I can imagine the camera runs heavily crippled on a 300 MB/s card vs the 1200MB/s write of the slowest CFExpress card. It’ll likely reduce a lot of the video modes and greatly reduce the frame rate.


----------



## padam (Feb 28, 2020)

unfocused said:


> More likely a BG-E22 type grip. Would be great if it used the same grip.


The new camera is wider and deeper and Canon almost always uses different grips for different camera models. So it will be called BG-E23.


----------



## padam (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Aye, I can imagine the camera runs heavily crippled on a 300 MB/s card vs the 1200MB/s write of the slowest CFExpress card. It’ll likely reduce a lot of the video modes and greatly reduce the frame rate.


The Canon cameras don't dual record video (only proxy recording), so two CFExpress cards (which also need more space on the body itself) are completely unnecessary in this case.


----------



## swblackwood (Feb 28, 2020)

yoms said:


> Do you think there's a chance we'll see an extension grip for the R5 as the RP has the EG-E1? Thanks.


More likely a real BAttery Grip. Possibly a new one as some have said a R5 body is slightly bigger than the R.


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 28, 2020)

We kinda expect this one...UHS-II are very fast cards that can be up to the task for most of the photography purposes leaving the cfexpress more to video matters. However....I don´t know what to think...In one way is good, it means we can use our sd cards...On the other hand...I think cfexpress is the future coming, so we will purchase a 2020 camera that still have the "old" technology...well, we know SD cards will be around for a while but I dont see myself buying more SD cards, we need to start investing in the new cfexpress specially for video...that´s why i am a bit afraid that i will be always swapping cfexpress cards and have a useless sd slot free...because i am quite sure that the 4k and 8k video recording will be almost exclusive to cfexpress recording. And I mean almost leaving out the [email protected] that i believe it can be recorded to the SD cards. 

Also, in stills buffer will be more limited with the UHS-II cards. If that is going to be an issue...don´t know...But it won´t be fast recording 45mp files without filling the buffer...If Canon can give us 100 raw files buffer without filling that buffer, then i guess its ok having an sd slot...


----------



## Bahrd (Feb 28, 2020)

Why not to use an internal super-fast solid drive (with a few capacity variants) instead of an SD card slot? 
A CFE card would nicely work like a backup then...


----------



## NorskHest (Feb 28, 2020)

padam said:


> The Canon cameras don't dual record video (only proxy recording), so two CFExpress cards (which also need more space on the body itself) are completely unnecessary in this case.


Look at the 1dxmkiii recording specs. 10bit 422 and 12 raw at the same time. I guess you could call that a proxy but then again not really


----------



## richperson (Feb 28, 2020)

swblackwood said:


> More likely a real BAttery Grip. Possibly a new one as some have said a R5 body is slightly bigger than the R.



I wish it was the same, but it will have to be different to mirror the controls on the body.


----------



## docsmith (Feb 28, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> why is a UHS-II SD slot suddenly useless?


Useless is an exaggeration. But having a card that can do 1-4 GB/sec and a card that can do ~300 MB/sec (and I think that is read speed) does introduce issues when you are pushing the limits of the camera. For example, 12 fps x 60 MB (assuming) files = 720 MB/sec. With the CFExpress card, you do not need to buffer that. With the UHS II card, you can not write directly to the card, thus it will need to be buffered. So, this is like having a Ferrari tethered to a Honda. Nothing is wrong with the Honda, other than to get the full performance out of the Ferrari you will need to cut the tether. In doing so, now you are shooting to a single card slot. For most applications this is not an issue and the low cost of the SD card and the fact that SD card readers are common is appreciated.

So, what did we just learn? The R5 will have its burst rate limited by buffer capacity if you want to shoot to both card slots. So starts the ways that we will see the R5 limited compared to the 1DX III. And this is not me whining. This was expected, it is a $3k camera compared to a $6,500 camera.


----------



## richperson (Feb 28, 2020)

I'm glad they have two different slots. The small slot for JPEG backups is nice. Also nice in those times when you want to record raw on the main card, but JPEG on the small card for ability to hand the card immediately to someone with a reader to print/transfer the file. If you had two CFExpress slots then you would have to bring the bulky reader with you or plug to the camera.


----------



## joestopper (Feb 28, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



Good news for still shooters since CFExpress has no value for stills (for a few of these cards one can better buy an RF lens)


----------



## AccipiterQ (Feb 28, 2020)

*CANON IS *******!! NO TRIPLE CARD SLOTS*


----------



## richperson (Feb 28, 2020)

docsmith said:


> So, what did we just learn? The R5 will have its burst rate limited by buffer capacity if you want to shoot to both card slots. So starts the ways that we will see the R5 limited compared to the 1DX III. And this is not me whining. This was expected, it is a $3k camera compared to a $6,500 camera.



I don't think this is totally accurate. It sounds like you are assuming raw to both cards, which I don't know why you would do that. If you shoot raw to the fast card and JPEG to the small card it shouldn't impact the buffer significantly should it?


----------



## joestopper (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> So it is a single slot camera with a useless SD slot for absolute last resort moments.



Supposedly funny? Not everyone shoots videos. SD is sufficientfor stills.


----------



## richperson (Feb 28, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Good news for still shooters since CFExpress has no value for stills (for a few of these cards one can better buy an RF lens)



Not true. If you are shooting high burst rate raw, then the faster speed likely will work with the processor to get you more shots in before the buffer is full, no? And, although not a huge deal, it is faster if you shoot 1000 raw files to get them on your computer.

When I run my 7Dii with both cards, if I accidentally set it to the SD slot, the fps lags repeatedly while it tries to write.


----------



## VICYASA (Feb 28, 2020)

Price point for body? $3,499? Sound about right?


----------



## Otara (Feb 28, 2020)

For me its great from a convenience perspective, even if its just to copy the files to the SD so I can just plug it in to my laptop.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

richperson said:


> I'm glad they have two different slots. The small slot for JPEG backups is nice. Also nice in those times when you want to record raw on the main card, but JPEG on the small card for ability to hand the card immediately to someone with a reader to print/transfer the file. If you had two CFExpress slots then you would have to bring the bulky reader with you or plug to the camera.



The second slot could have been a CFExpress type A, which is as small as a SD card


----------



## joestopper (Feb 28, 2020)

unfocused said:


> More likely a BG-E22 type grip. Would be great if it used the same grip.



Thebody of the R5 has slightly different dimensions --> BG-E22 will not fit


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Supposedly funny? Not everyone shoots videos. SD is sufficientfor stills.



SD is not going to let you pull off 12/20 FPS 40+ MP/s. It's also going to greatly slow down dumping the data onto you computer. I have absolutely no interest in video, or I would buy a C line camera or better.


----------



## joestopper (Feb 28, 2020)

richperson said:


> Not true. If you are shooting high burst rate raw, then the faster speed likely will work with the processor to get you more shots in before the buffer is full, no? And, although not a huge deal, it is faster if you shoot 1000 raw files to get them on your computer.
> 
> When I run my 7Dii with both cards, if I accidentally set it to the SD slot, the fps lags repeatedly while it tries to write.



It will depend on the buffer size and how many burts for sure. Anyway, I am talking more of the regular stills shooter like architecture, landscape, portrait etc. Sports is a different story. But then, well, there is the other slot with CFExpress. Having a fast and a regular makes a lot of sense.


----------



## joestopper (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> SD is not going to let you pull off 12/20 FPS 40+ MP/s. It's also going to greatly slow down dumping the data onto you computer. I have absolutely no interest in video, or I would buy a C line camera or better.



I am talking of stills. 12/20 FPS is already a movie...


----------



## slclick (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> So it is a single slot camera with a useless SD slot for absolute last resort moments.


What a ricockulous thing to say.


----------



## slclick (Feb 28, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.


Yes, some people are. It's called a budget. (not to mention kids in college!)


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

joestopper said:


> I am talking of stills. 12/20 FPS is already a movie...



No it is getting just the right position of the wing. Just the right pose of the fox pouncing on the rabbit. It is nought to do with shooting a movie.


----------



## Deleted member 68328 (Feb 28, 2020)

swblackwood said:


> More likely a real BAttery Grip. Possibly a new one as some have said a R5 body is slightly bigger than the R.


I'd like both. Options...


----------



## joestopper (Feb 28, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.



Why waste money for expensive CFExpress cards when speed is not needed? I rather buy my next RF lens (RF 70-135).


----------



## TracerHD (Feb 28, 2020)

For sure the Body is SD + CFE,
and the batterygrip adds Dual CFE.

oke not, but would be funny....


----------



## joestopper (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> No it is getting just the right position of the wing. Just the right pose of the fox pouncing on the rabbit. It is nought to do with shooting a movie.



If you do that, good for you. I dont for my work ...


----------



## Bennymiata (Feb 28, 2020)

I think Canon has done the right thing.
A UHS II card can easily record 450mb/sec on my R.
Forcing people to buy 2 CFExpress cards for their new camera would hold some people back from buying as they are expensive.


----------



## docsmith (Feb 28, 2020)

richperson said:


> I don't think this is totally accurate. It sounds like you are assuming raw to both cards, which I don't know why you would do that. If you shoot raw to the fast card and JPEG to the small card it shouldn't impact the buffer significantly should it?


First off...there is a limitation even in your statement: jpeg to the second card slot. And maybe I am just a jaded former owner of the 5DIII (overall I loved it, but I hated the SD card slot), but I tried jpeg to the SD (UHS I?) card slot but eventually would just turn off that card slot whenever I wanted to truly get all those lightning fast 6 fps.

But, to better respond, I've gone and looked up write speeds to UHS II cards....seems like most of the "fastest" UHS II cards have "up to" 200 to 260 MB/sec write speeds in this article on fastest cards from B&H. A few quick searches on regular (but still Lexar, Sandisk and still UHS II) and I saw 120 MB/sec and 160/sec go by. (EDIT--just looked at my own SD cards that I have "around"...Sandisk Extreme Pros from a couple years go --95 MB/sec...). As I actually shoot RAW to the CF card and jpegs to my SD card in my 5DIV, I just popped out my SD card and looked at a few of the jpeg file size. The low ISO shots were 5-7 MB and the high ISO shots were 13-15 MB. Scale that up to a larger sensor rumored to being in the R5, I am going with 9 MB/sec low end and 21 MB/sec high end (45/30 x 6 and x 14).

So, 12 fps x 9 MB = 108 MB/sec, 21 MB/sec x 12 fps = 252 MB/sec. But then, jump to the 20 fps and you get 180 MB/sec and 420 MB/sec. Bottom line, some of these will require buffering, even with jpegs. This isn't the end of the world. Actually, fast cards paired with even a moderate buffer are still going to be pretty impressive and just fine for most applications. 

But, there is a reason the 1DX III has dual CF Express card slots. This is not that.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 28, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.


Hideously expensive ??????


----------



## Nelu (Feb 28, 2020)

I really don't know what the hell is wrong with people today...
Guys, if you have money, get the CRExpress card and the SD card.
If you don't have enough money for a CFEpress card (after you just paid around $4000 for the camera, LOL), then don't buy it. Buy the SD card instead.
It's a simple as that. You have options and it's still not OK???


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Feb 28, 2020)

I'm ok with this. I've had several bodies with one CF slot and one SD slot and never once have a I wished for two CF slots. The second slot is a spare and a fast SD card is fine for that.

In another respect, I'm more than ok with it, I'm delighted - and that's because it confirms the R5 will be marketed at 5D4 level and therefore almost certainly the same ball park launch price (which was £3500 IIRC), if not a little less. I really don't need a £5000 body, especially when I'm still a bit uncertain about this whole mirrorless thing!


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 28, 2020)

Now what other rumour tidbits are being held back for tomorrow? I'm impatient!

Jack


----------



## Fran Decatta (Feb 28, 2020)

R5 need that Cfast for store those 45 mpx photos at 20 fps and video features. Having read that, I hope R6 will have simply dual SD. due to his mpx, hope to see full specs of both, probably none of them will dissapoint.


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 28, 2020)

docsmith said:


> First off...there is a limitation even in your statement: jpeg to the second card slot. And maybe I am just a jaded former owner of the 5DIII (overall I loved it, but I hated the SD card slot), but I tried jpeg to the SD (UHS I?) card slot but eventually would just turn off that card slot whenever I wanted to truly get all those lightning fast 6 fps.
> 
> But, to better respond, I've gone and looked up write speeds to UHS II cards....seems like most of the "fastest" UHS II cards have "up to" 200 to 260 MB/sec write speeds in this article on fastest cards from B&H. A few quick searches on regular (but still Lexar, Sandisk and still UHS II) and I saw 120 MB/sec and 160/sec go by. As I actually shoot RAW to the CF card and jpegs to my SD card in my 5DIV, I just popped out my SD card and looked at a few of the jpeg file size. The low ISO shots were 5-7 MB and the high ISO shots were 13-15 MB. Scale that up to a larger sensor rumored to being in the R5, I am going with 9 MB/sec low end and 21 MB/sec high end (45/30 x 6 and x 14).
> 
> ...



You are right! SD cards will eventually need a good buffer and cfexpress wont. That´s the main point for stills. And everybody is assuming that the 2 slot is for duplicated photos, being cfexpress in raw and JPG in SD. But there are a lotof people including myself that uses the 2 slots for raw. When a card is full the camera records in the 2nd slot. And why this? Well sometimes in wildlife you have great moments and you just keep shooting. Specially in situations of predation. Can you imagine a 45MP file? Imagine now shooting at 20 fps, or 10 fps even....That will fill up a 64gb card in no time! And thats why we need 2nd card slot so we dont loose time swapping cards. 

Nowadays because of Canon delay in mirrorless, I am using a Sony A7r3 and Iuse it also for wildlife. I use 2 SD UHS-II one 128gb and other 64 gb, and i can guarantee you guys that they fill easily if you are in a great moment! 45mp makes huge file sizes. If you don´t have same cards that might be a problem. Also in my 1dx mkII I have same issue...The camera have 2 different slots and that made me invest in 2 different types of cards cfast ad regular CF. CFast are so much faster than the CF....

And not to mention video....cfexpress is mandatory for video. So...if you are reading this and thinking..."Well if you are a wildlife guy just buy the 1dx mkIII"! And you are right, but this R5 with 20fps and 40/45 MP is the dreamy camera! And also i want to dive in the mirrorless RF cameras, they are the future!  





Nelu said:


> I really don't know what the hell is wrong with people today...
> Guys, if you have money, get the CRExpress card and the SD card.
> If you don't have enough money for a CFEpress card (after you just paid around $4000 for the camera, LOL), then don't buy it. Buy the SD card instead.
> It's a simple as that. You have options and it's still not OK???



Not complaining, at least on my side! I will buy the camera with the 2 cfexpress or 1sd and 1 cf. It´s just a preferences discussion were we all say our reasons and likes and dislikes. We are all different and thats what makes this funny!


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 28, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Now what other rumour tidbits are being held back for tomorrow? I'm impatient!
> 
> Jack



Hope they will announce an earlier release!!! We want this camera in May please!!!!


----------



## joestopper (Feb 28, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Now what other rumour tidbits are being held back for tomorrow? I'm impatient!
> 
> Jack



While CanonRumors is really a nice site and most info provided is appreciated, I also do notice that info is provided slice by slice just in the right dosis to keep traffic alive ...


----------



## richperson (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> The second slot could have been a CFExpress type A, which is as small as a SD card



Does it work in a common reader? That is why I would appreciate the SD slot. Readers are everywhere.


----------



## richperson (Feb 28, 2020)

docsmith said:


> First off...there is a limitation even in your statement: jpeg to the second card slot. And maybe I am just a jaded former owner of the 5DIII (overall I loved it, but I hated the SD card slot), but I tried jpeg to the SD (UHS I?) card slot but eventually would just turn off that card slot whenever I wanted to truly get all those lightning fast 6 fps.
> 
> But, to better respond, I've gone and looked up write speeds to UHS II cards....seems like most of the "fastest" UHS II cards have "up to" 200 to 260 MB/sec write speeds in this article on fastest cards from B&H. A few quick searches on regular (but still Lexar, Sandisk and still UHS II) and I saw 120 MB/sec and 160/sec go by. (EDIT--just looked at my own SD cards that I have "around"...Sandisk Extreme Pros from a couple years go --95 MB/sec...). As I actually shoot RAW to the CF card and jpegs to my SD card in my 5DIV, I just popped out my SD card and looked at a few of the jpeg file size. The low ISO shots were 5-7 MB and the high ISO shots were 13-15 MB. Scale that up to a larger sensor rumored to being in the R5, I am going with 9 MB/sec low end and 21 MB/sec high end (45/30 x 6 and x 14).
> 
> ...



I don't really disagree with anything you said. Clearly the R5 is not the Sports R, but if someone wants to use it that way, they have the CFExpress to capture 20fps with an unknown, but likely reasonable buffer--nowhere near the 1DXIII I agree. And for the rest that are shooting portraits or landscape, the convenience of the SD slot is there. 

On my 7D, which as has a fast card, slow card layout, honestly I don't use the slow slot for sports, only as a backup for important theater or events--where the write speed really doesn't matter.


----------



## Danglin52 (Feb 28, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> certainly makes the camera more affordable. Everyone's got sd cards lying about.
> 
> 
> 
> I think there is a great chance that Canon will produce a grip for the R5. They make grips for most of their larger body lineup.



I hope so, the grips is on my "buy" list with the rest of my R5 gear to help in working with long lenses for wildlife. The CFexpress plus SD UHS II works perfectly for me at this time. I will either buy 1 or 2 CF Express 256gb cards to use as my primary primary card and use the SD slot for a "backup" that will be removed and saved until I return from trips and uploaded to the normal workflow. This will provide some time for the cost of the Cfexpress cards to come down. 

David


----------



## fabao (Feb 28, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> We kinda expect this one...UHS-II are very fast cards that can be up to the task for most of the photography purposes leaving the cfexpress more to video matters. However....I don´t know what to think...In one way is good, it means we can use our sd cards...On the other hand...I think cfexpress is the future coming, so we will purchase a 2020 camera that still have the "old" technology...well, we know SD cards will be around for a while but I dont see myself buying more SD cards, we need to start investing in the new cfexpress specially for video...that´s why i am a bit afraid that i will be always swapping cfexpress cards and have a useless sd slot free...because i am quite sure that the 4k and 8k video recording will be almost exclusive to cfexpress recording. And I mean almost leaving out the [email protected] that i believe it can be recorded to the SD cards.
> 
> Also, in stills buffer will be more limited with the UHS-II cards. If that is going to be an issue...don´t know...But it won´t be fast recording 45mp files without filling the buffer...If Canon can give us 100 raw files buffer without filling that buffer, then i guess its ok having an sd slot...



Totally agree. Compatibility is good but, I would prefer 2 CFExpress card slots, even though I would have to buy them. It is like buying an expensive triathlon bike and putting a cheap water bottle that will increase drag because you don't want to spend the money to buy an aerodynamic water bottle.


----------



## Doug7131 (Feb 28, 2020)

So the R5 will have a better storage than any Sony camera (including the A9 which seems to manage fine with 2 SD slots) an people are still complaining?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

richperson said:


> Does it work in a common reader? That is why I would appreciate the SD slot. Readers are everywhere.



CFExpress B readers are getting out there. Type A are currently unknown, it'll need a camera to be released with it. Type A cards being sized with SD cards and basically working as SDE would work suggests we might just get one format to rule them all, just in different physical sizes. Most common SD readers out there are much slower than the cards, so I would go for USB connection to dump out the card quicker.

Having a Type A card would mean the camera wouldn't slow down in stills, a SD card will slow it down and I dislike having legacy ports and slots on the new era camera.


----------



## dwarven (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Aye, I can imagine the camera runs heavily crippled on a 300 MB/s card vs the 1200MB/s write of the slowest CFExpress card. It’ll likely reduce a lot of the video modes and greatly reduce the frame rate.



Leave it to the guy with an anime avatar to spread misinformation.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

dwarven said:


> Leave it to the guy with an anime avatar to spread misinformation.



Don't like what your reading so you resort to fussing about what my current avatar is.. stay classy!


----------



## docsmith (Feb 28, 2020)

Btw, just checked B&H, these 300 MB/sec SD cards, 128 GB: $200. CF express 128 GB: $200-$260. 

So, if you want performance out of the second card slot, not much of a savings. 

I don’t mean to sound negative about this, just more working through the realization of what this means.


----------



## Trey T (Feb 28, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> why is a UHS-II SD slot suddenly useless?


If the topic was about the capability of the current technology, everybody would arm up and put on their math wiz game. Now that Canon give us everything we needed, it's all useless. 

Just ... people .... man ... poor spirited people


----------



## dwarven (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Don't like what your reading so you resort to fussing about what my current avatar is.. stay classy!



I'd be more worried about the false information part if I were you.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

dwarven said:


> I'd be more worried about the false information part if I were you.



Perhaps read what I wrote. Key phrases like "I imagine", "likely". And then separate facts such as 300MB/s vs 1200MB/s. Again, stay classy!


----------



## gbc (Feb 28, 2020)

richperson said:


> Not true. If you are shooting high burst rate raw, then the faster speed likely will work with the processor to get you more shots in before the buffer is full, no? And, although not a huge deal, it is faster if you shoot 1000 raw files to get them on your computer.
> 
> When I run my 7Dii with both cards, if I accidentally set it to the SD slot, the fps lags repeatedly while it tries to write.


When I first got my Canon R and used my old SD cards, the buffer would fill up pretty quickly. Once I upgraded to a 300mb (95mb-ish write speed) card, I've almost never filled the buffer, taking 15-20 burst photos at a time.


----------



## dwarven (Feb 28, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Perhaps read what I wrote. Key phrases like "I imagine", "likely". And then separate facts such as 300MB/s vs 1200MB/s. Again, stay classy!


If you’re shooting weddings and you need that much burst you’re doing it wrong. If you’re shooting sports you’re going to be using a 1DX III.This camera represents a compromise between having a fully decked out pro body and cost. Also there’s no mention of bus speed for the CFexpress card. If it’s PCIe 2.0, then it doesn’t matter how fast the card is. If It is using PCIe 3.0 and they added a second CFexpress slot it would have raised the cost of the body even higher. 300MB/s is fast enough for 99% of photographers anyway. UHS ii is also backward compatible with UHS i so you can use your old SD cards if you want.


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 28, 2020)

fabao said:


> Totally agree. Compatibility is good but, I would prefer 2 CFExpress card slots, even though I would have to buy them. It is like buying an expensive triathlon bike and putting a cheap water bottle that will increase drag because you don't want to spend the money to buy an aerodynamic water bottle.


And also the price difference from a good SD UHS-II card and a CFexpress card is not too much. If you buy a 64gb 300mb/s SD UHS-II will be around 100/120€, the cfexpress Sandisk 64gb is around 140€ so the only positive is that if you already have the SD fast ones, you don´t need to buy more. I understand the option of Canon, but personally would prefer 2 cfexpress slots, though. I expect to use this camera for around 4 years, and i guess in 2 years SD will be declining...Not disapearing, but almost and being only in the entry level cameras. This is bad because manufacturers will also stop improving the cards...so you will have a "not so used" slot in 3/4 years. But well, it´s not a dealbreaker at all!


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 28, 2020)

dwarven said:


> If you’re shooting weddings and you need that much burst you’re doing it wrong. If you’re shooting sports you’re going to be using a 1DX III.This camera represents a compromise between having a fully decked out pro body and cost. Also there’s no mention of bus speed for the CFexpress card. If it’s PCIe 2.0, then it doesn’t matter how fast the card is. If It is using PCIe 3.0 and they added a second CFexpress slot it would have raised the cost of the body even higher. 300MB/s is fast enough for 99% of photographers anyway.



Only interested in animals. Weddings would not even remotely pay enough money to be worth it, major respect to anyone that has the patients to photograph a wedding.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Feb 28, 2020)

Great! I think that is expected and it's the best combination. SD card is great for almost everything and affordable, even the best ones.


----------



## Bert63 (Feb 28, 2020)

Two things.

1 - I know I want this camera and I'm probably going to order about three and a half seconds after I find out it's available...

AND

2 - Oh cripes my hopes of $3,500 are circling the bottom of the crapper...


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 28, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> And everybody is assuming that the 2 slot is for duplicated photos, being cfexpress in raw and JPG in SD. But there are a lotof people including myself that uses the 2 slots for raw. When a card is full the camera records in the 2nd slot.



What's the point in the backup slot if you write raw to only one slot? I always write raw to the both. jpeg is basically useless for me. If I buy R5, I'll be writing raw to the both slots as well.


----------



## jdavidse (Feb 28, 2020)

richperson said:


> I don't think this is totally accurate. It sounds like you are assuming raw to both cards, which I don't know why you would do that. If you shoot raw to the fast card and JPEG to the small card it shouldn't impact the buffer significantly should it?



There was a test of the 5D IV years ago that showed if you write RAW to both cards it is faster compared to if you write RAW to one and Jpeg to another. Presumably this was because the camera has to use processing power to create the jpeg. This could be moot with all the updated horsepower but it's something to check out when you get one.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 28, 2020)

As long as Canon doesnt have the write speed throtled down to the slowest card installed as in previous dslrs


----------



## jam05 (Feb 28, 2020)

jdavidse said:


> There was a test of the 5D IV years ago that showed if you write RAW to both cards it is faster compared to if you write RAW to one and Jpeg to another. Presumably this was because the camera has to use processing power to create the jpeg. This could be moot with all the updated horsepower but it's something to check out when you get one.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 28, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Only if both cards have equal write speeds. Canon and other manufacturers have had the write speed equal to the slowest card installed


----------



## jam05 (Feb 28, 2020)

NorskHest said:


> Look at the 1dxmkiii recording specs. 10bit 422 and 12 raw at the same time. I guess you could call that a proxy but then again not really


however CFexpress in one slot and a much slower SD in the second slot will = write speed at the slower card slot speed such has been the previous case.


----------



## chaos2k (Feb 28, 2020)

https://www.henrys.com/96560-SANDISK-128GB-EXTREME-PRO-SDHC-UHS-II.aspx $399

https://www.henrys.com/107541-SANDISK-128GB-CFEXPRESS-EXTREME-PRO-TYPE-B.aspx $359


----------



## jam05 (Feb 28, 2020)

Question will be. Has Canon chaged its write speed priority? Max write speed to the slower card? Thus one only benefits from the 1GBS write bus if using the CFexpress slot and leaving slot 2 empty


----------



## jam05 (Feb 28, 2020)

chaos2k said:


> https://www.henrys.com/96560-SANDISK-128GB-EXTREME-PRO-SDHC-UHS-II.aspx $399
> 
> https://www.henrys.com/107541-SANDISK-128GB-CFEXPRESS-EXTREME-PRO-TYPE-B.aspx $359


max write speed vs CFexpress? why spend that money for that slot when the other slot is more than 5 times faster?


----------



## Juangrande (Feb 28, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.


You don’t even know the price of the R5.


----------



## davo (Feb 28, 2020)

yoms said:


> Do you think there's a chance we'll see an extension grip for the R5 as the RP has the EG-E1? Thanks.


I think you are going to see all sorts of addons for the R5 including extension grips, from canon and third party. Its going to be a VERY popular camera


----------



## jam05 (Feb 28, 2020)

jam05 said:


> max write speed vs CFexpress? why spend that money for that slot when the other slot is more than 5 times faster?


128GB $197 at Best buy.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

chaos2k said:


> https://www.henrys.com/96560-SANDISK-128GB-EXTREME-PRO-SDHC-UHS-II.aspx $399
> 
> https://www.henrys.com/107541-SANDISK-128GB-CFEXPRESS-EXTREME-PRO-TYPE-B.aspx $359


$197 at Best Buy for 128 gb


----------



## SecureGSM (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> So it is a single slot camera with a useless SD slot for absolute last resort moments.


Say what?


----------



## SecureGSM (Feb 29, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.



Please define hideously expensive. $$$$$3000, 3500, 4000, 4500, 5000 ? Thank you.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

richperson said:


> I don't think this is totally accurate. It sounds like you are assuming raw to both cards, which I don't know why you would do that. If you shoot raw to the fast card and JPEG to the small card it shouldn't impact the buffer significantly should it?


It will throttled back to write a the slower speed which would be a waste of the CFexpress 1gbs speed. One would only write to the CFexpress with the SD empty. Or else 2 SD cards.


----------



## SecureGSM (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> It will throttled back to write a the slower speed which would be a waste of the CFexpress 1gbs speed. One would only write to the CFexpress with the SD empty. Or else 2 SD cards.


Nope, RAW (large file ) to CF Express and JPG (smaller) to SD. RAW is what about 4 times larger than JPG?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 29, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Say what?


If you are shooting the camera at full speed and want a backup you are out of luck with that SD card slowing things down. We don’t know exactly how bad it’ll limit the camera, but surely it has to in spme way given ho many pixels it is pushing. If on the other hand you are under 10 frames a minute at a wedding or the lik, it won’t effect you in the slightest.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

docsmith said:


> First off...there is a limitation even in your statement: jpeg to the second card slot. And maybe I am just a jaded former owner of the 5DIII (overall I loved it, but I hated the SD card slot), but I tried jpeg to the SD (UHS I?) card slot but eventually would just turn off that card slot whenever I wanted to truly get all those lightning fast 6 fps.
> 
> But, to better respond, I've gone and looked up write speeds to UHS II cards....seems like most of the "fastest" UHS II cards have "up to" 200 to 260 MB/sec write speeds in this article on fastest cards from B&H. A few quick searches on regular (but still Lexar, Sandisk and still UHS II) and I saw 120 MB/sec and 160/sec go by. (EDIT--just looked at my own SD cards that I have "around"...Sandisk Extreme Pros from a couple years go --95 MB/sec...). As I actually shoot RAW to the CF card and jpegs to my SD card in my 5DIV, I just popped out my SD card and looked at a few of the jpeg file size. The low ISO shots were 5-7 MB and the high ISO shots were 13-15 MB. Scale that up to a larger sensor rumored to being in the R5, I am going with 9 MB/sec low end and 21 MB/sec high end (45/30 x 6 and x 14).
> 
> ...


with two different speed slots in use, the max write speed will be that of the slower card.


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 29, 2020)

Experienced and level-headed photographers never forget that photography, of all the crafts and all the hobbies, is built on compromises. Are the two cards a PERFECT match in terms of performance? Of course not. Will the SD slot be useful when that nagging need for a backup possesses us, should we fear the newer CFE tech might fail? (Or the other way, slight as chances are?) Yes!

If pure speed is the priority, Canon has delivered. If backup is the priority, Canon has delivered. If saving a little money during the learning phase with this camera while waiting for CFE prices to come down is important, Canon has delivered.

If finding anything to moan and groan about is your joy in life, then, once again, Canon has delivered!

Had Canon used dual CFE slots, we'd hear how it has put the camera out of the reach of the common people (who can afford the body and a quiver of lenses, but not two CFE cards).

Go, Canon, go!


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

Absolutely no sense in always having the SD card slot used with CFexpress in the other slot. The CFexpress will never obtain the advertised high speed with the SD card installed hence a waste of its write speed capabilities


----------



## davo (Feb 29, 2020)

Doug7131 said:


> ............ an people are still complaining?


Welcome to the internet. You must be new


----------



## dwarven (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Question will be. Has Canon chaged its write speed priority? Max write speed to the slower card? Thus one only benefits from the 1GBS write bus if using the CFexpress slot and leaving slot 2 empty



Yeah, it's almost like Canon is giving us a choice in how we want to shoot while keeping the cost below a 1DX Mark III. Weird.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

davo said:


> Welcome to the internet. You must be new


Because with the slower SD installed and the CFexpress also, max speed equals to that of the slower card. One will never get dual CFexpress bus speed. Thus one would have to remove the SD card for that CFexpress bus speed


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Because with the slower SD installed and the CFexpress also, max speed equals to that of the slower card. One will never get dual CFexpress bus speed. Thus one would have to remove the SD card for that CFexpress bus speed


If I purchased a CFexpress card, I would use it and leave the other slot empty else use 2 SDHC cards


----------



## jazzytune (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> The 1DxIII has two slots so I would not expect a downgrade.


What downgrade? The R5 won't be the mirrorless equivalent of the 1Dx MkIII! For pictures, the SD UHS-II will be just fine in at least 95% of the cases. I understand that for video at 8K or 4K 60p it will likely not suffice, but personally, I'm happy that it will have both cards format.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

This is to keep the 5D owners happy. Those that cant afford CFexpress cards. Until there are enough complaints about only having one CFexpress card slot.


----------



## David the street guy (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> $197 at Best Buy for 128 gb



Wait a minute, here! You're comparing the price of a CFexpress card in american dollars to the prices of SD cards in canadian dollars…

By the way, Prograde is selling their CFexpress 120 gb cards for 180 US$ and their fastest 128 gb SD cards for 160 US$.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

Mark3794 said:


> Sounds great, double CFExpress would be really expensive for users


Why purchase a CFexpress card and use it with an SD card in the second slot. You lose the advantage. A waste of money. The CFexpress has only an advantage when using it alone. The write speed is always equal to that of the slower card.


----------



## tpatana (Feb 29, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.



This logic keep irritating me year after year.

Regardless how much the body costs, buying $100 memory card will cost $100.


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 29, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> What's the point in the backup slot if you write raw to only one slot? I always write raw to the both. jpeg is basically useless for me. If I buy R5, I'll be writing raw to the both slots as well.



Well, there are several situations where you will want to write rw in one card and jpeg in other.
For example Photojournalism, sports or weddings. In this type of works I always shoot jpeg in one card and raw in other.

- Photojournalism, sports: First...security, if one card fails you still have another one. Second, in sports or photojournalism you don´t edit the photos, you don´t have time to do it, so you deliver the jpeg file. So jpeg is your primary files. Raws, you save them if you want to edit a photo to make it more artistic for example. Or also for security, if you fail very bad the exposure or the white balance you have the raws to save the day.

- Weddings: Usually I save in one card the raws and in other card jpegs. Why? First security (If raw card fails at least you still have the jpegs to save the day...) and second speed. Sometimes the couple asks you to make a fast presentation in the end of the day and you dont have any time to edit. So you choose some of the best jpegs and put it in the computer. Fast and simple and a happy costumer.

- In wildlife...It depends....sometimes I don´t write in both cards making copies, i do prefer to use both cards writing because I very often fill both cards. If I am on assignment i always carry my laptop so in the dead periods when nothing happen often take of the cards and make direct copies to ssd drives. One at the time..of course cause in wildlife we know how fast and unpredictable are the moments. So, as i make almost instant copies i dont need to make dual raw writing.

But I understand what you are saying, and if you dont make photojournalism, sports or that wedding services, so it´s a good idea to shoot raw to both cards. We never know....


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

docsmith said:


> Useless is an exaggeration. But having a card that can do 1-4 GB/sec and a card that can do ~300 MB/sec (and I think that is read speed) does introduce issues when you are pushing the limits of the camera. For example, 12 fps x 60 MB (assuming) files = 720 MB/sec. With the CFExpress card, you do not need to buffer that. With the UHS II card, you can not write directly to the card, thus it will need to be buffered. So, this is like having a Ferrari tethered to a Honda. Nothing is wrong with the Honda, other than to get the full performance out of the Ferrari you will need to cut the tether. In doing so, now you are shooting to a single card slot. For most applications this is not an issue and the low cost of the SD card and the fact that SD card readers are common is appreciated.
> 
> So, what did we just learn? The R5 will have its burst rate limited by buffer capacity if you want to shoot to both card slots. So starts the ways that we will see the R5 limited compared to the 1DX III. And this is not me whining. This was expected, it is a $3k camera compared to a $6,500 camera.


1gbs per channel write speed for CFexpress
640mbs for gen 2 UHS II Write speed. The camera will write at max speed of the slower slot if used togerher. Has been always the case.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> So it is a single slot camera with a useless SD slot for absolute last resort moments.


basically yes, if you want to use the CFexpress slot and purchased a CFexpress card. We're paying for the CFexpress bus/ PCIe. But we only get one.


----------



## David the street guy (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Why purchase a CFexpress card and use it with an SD card in the second slot. You lose the advantage. A waste of money. The CFexpress has only an advantage when using it alone. The write speed is always equal to that of the slower card.



And why should this be the only possible rule? Why couldn't we imagine a scenario in which the SD card is only used when the CFexpress card is full? Or only as a backup, which doesn't have to be as fast as the main card. Or only to store jpeg? 

Why limit our imagination to what we believe to be true?


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 29, 2020)

tpatana said:


> This logic keep irritating me year after year.
> 
> Regardless how much the body costs, buying $100 memory card will cost $100.


Yes....But you have to understand that when you buy a camera or a type of camera, you don´t buy "only" the camera! You have to think about the hole ecossistem! If you buy a camera that pushes the limits of writing and ask for better cards you need to accept that you will need better cards. It´s like choosing fullframe or aps-c...If you choose fullframe you know you will need to invest more in lenses. Other wise whats the point of buying a FF? 

So..if you are going to buy a camera like the 1dx mkIII or the EOS R5 yes..of course you will need to think about buying new cards And if you are not ready to buy those cards...you might want to think twice about buying those cameras! 
Of course if you have already good SD cards and the R5 has a SD slot, you dont need those Cfexpress cards. But tell me, Will you buy the R5 without buying at least one cfexpress card?


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> 1gbs per channel write speed for CFexpress
> 640mbs for gen 2 UHS II Write speed. The camera will write at max speed of the slower slot if used togerher. Has been always the case.





jam05 said:


> 1gbs per channel write speed for CFexpress
> 640mbs for gen 2 UHS II Write speed. The camera will write at max speed of the slower slot if used togerher. Has been always the case.


Those that shoot RAW+JPEG to separate cards will not benefit from the CFexpress bus at all. Nada. A wedding photog would not shoot both to the same card. Defeats the purpose of dual cards.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

David the street guy said:


> And why should this be the only possible rule? Why couldn't we imagine a scenario in which the SD card is only used when the CFexpress card is full? Or only as a backup, which doesn't have to be as fast as the main card. Or only to store jpeg?
> 
> Why limit our imagination to what we believe to be true?


Because it IS the rule. With two cards of different speeds inserted the camera will wite at the speed of the slower card. It has always been this way. With all brands. IF paying for a 1gbs write speed vs the 640mbs SD card one has completely negated that speed by inserting the tortoise like SD card into the second slot.


----------



## usern4cr (Feb 29, 2020)

richperson said:


> I don't think this is totally accurate. It sounds like you are assuming raw to both cards, which I don't know why you would do that. If you shoot raw to the fast card and JPEG to the small card it shouldn't impact the buffer significantly should it?


I shoot raw only - period! So I have no use for saving jpgs. So I'll either have to store to 1 card only, or else store to both and hope the slower card doesn't cause a slowdown in shooting stills (which it probably won't for my typical use). Fortunately I don't shoot much video, or else I'd be very disappointed with one much slower card.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

richperson said:


> I'm glad they have two different slots. The small slot for JPEG backups is nice. Also nice in those times when you want to record raw on the main card, but JPEG on the small card for ability to hand the card immediately to someone with a reader to print/transfer the file. If you had two CFExpress slots then you would have to bring the bulky reader with you or plug to the camera.


you paid for the CFexpress bus/PCIe. It will never be used at its max speed when an SD card is in the second slot. 1gbs CFexpress vs 300 - 640mbs SD card. you will be getting 640mbs tops. Thats tortoise like speed in 2020. Waste of the second slot when using an SD card. May as well use 2 SD cards. Thus the 1dxIII has dual CFexpress slots. Not one of each. Canon is banking on 5D users simply either not using CFexpress cards yet happy paying for it.


----------



## jam05 (Feb 29, 2020)

Cant give the R5 dual CFexpress cards and the new joy stick? Because the flagship model has it
You will get 1gbs write speed per channel in the R5 only without backup.


----------



## usern4cr (Feb 29, 2020)

I only write .raw files - period! However, there *IS* a way to write raw to the fast slot at full speed and also use the "background time" (when not writing to the fast slot) to copy the fast slot shots to the slow slot. For stills you will always have periods where you're not shooting and that's plenty of time to copy to the slow slot. For video at highest data rates you will have to wait till you stop shooting video for the copy to commence (which will take awhile). But it will eventually get everything copied (and it will *not* stop you from shooting more to the fast slot since that takes priority over background copies).

If Canon implements this "background store to 2nd slot" then I will be *so* happy since you get raws stored at max speed to 1 slot as well as raws copied to the other slot as time allows!


----------



## canonnews (Feb 29, 2020)

usern4cr said:


> I shoot raw only - period! So I have no use for saving jpgs. So I'll either have to store to 1 card only, or else store to both and hope the slower card doesn't cause a slowdown in shooting stills (which it probably won't for my typical use). Fortunately I don't shoot much video, or else I'd be very disappointed with one much slower card.



CFExpress is required for faster video.. fast UHS-II cards should be fine in all but the worst of circumstances. Just don't use generation UHS-I cards that you get for $1.99 from china. Somehow sony manages on their flagship to shoot with UHS-II cards and people live to tell the story. You're not going to notice that much of a difference between 640mbs and 1gbs in the real world unless you are button mashing at 20 fps. most people because this will most likely have a slower sensor than the 1DXIII, will find the electronic shutter 20 fps limited, so be using 12 fps for stills because of the mechanical shutter anyways.

Also the faster card is in there most specifically because of video. so i'm not sure how you'd be disappointed with CFE/SD for video.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Aye, I can imagine the camera runs heavily crippled on a 300 MB/s card vs the 1200MB/s write of the slowest CFExpress card. It’ll likely reduce a lot of the video modes and greatly reduce the frame rate.


Dude, you need a happy pill.


----------



## bellorusso (Feb 29, 2020)

Hate it when they use two different types of media.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> No it is getting just the right position of the wing. Just the right pose of the fox pouncing on the rabbit. It is nought to do with shooting a movie.


Dang. Luckily for you there’s a CFexpress slot for raw in addition to an SD UHS II for jpegs. Otherwise the world might end. Fox must have really increased hang time since my younger days.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

fabao said:


> Totally agree. Compatibility is good but, I would prefer 2 CFExpress card slots, even though I would have to buy them. It is like buying an expensive triathlon bike and putting a cheap water bottle that will increase drag because you don't want to spend the money to buy an aerodynamic water bottle.


Just shave your legs. My gosh, aerodynamic water bottle? Now THAT’S a race winner. They must be really expensive.


----------



## Lenscracker (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Good news for still shooters since CFExpress has no value for stills (for a few of these cards one can better buy an RF lens)


Agreed. I do not need CFE to shoot stills most of the time. If I do need 20fps for birding or something I will quickly change to recording only on the CFE card.


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

fabao said:


> Totally agree. Compatibility is good but, I would prefer 2 CFExpress card slots, even though I would have to buy them. It is like buying an expensive triathlon bike and putting a cheap water bottle that will increase drag because you don't want to spend the money to buy an aerodynamic water bottle.


No it is not.


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

fabao said:


> Totally agree. Compatibility is good but, I would prefer 2 CFExpress card slots, even though I would have to buy them. It is like buying an expensive triathlon bike and putting a cheap water bottle that will increase drag because you don't want to spend the money to buy an aerodynamic water bottle.



You have an option: Buy the 1DX III and let us who are less extreme enjoy the R5 which offers options instead of extremes.


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Only interested in animals. Weddings would not even remotely pay enough money to be worth it, major respect to anyone that has the patients to photograph a wedding.


is the Doctor getting married?


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 29, 2020)

No matter where you are in the world you can always beg borrow or steal an SD card. The world is full of places where you’ll be SOOL if you need a CFExpress in a hurry. Good for Canon going with the rational choice.


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

Never once in using the 5D3 for almost 8 years did I have issues or even think about having mixed slots. I truly love the problems of being a stills shooter over myriad of issues video people have. We win.


----------



## vjlex (Feb 29, 2020)

docsmith said:


> As I actually shoot RAW to the CF card and jpegs to my SD card in my 5DIV, I just popped out my SD card and looked at a few of the jpeg file size. The low ISO shots were 5-7 MB and the high ISO shots were 13-15 MB. Scale that up to a larger sensor rumored to being in the R5, I am going with 9 MB/sec low end and 21 MB/sec high end (45/30 x 6 and x 14).
> 
> So, 12 fps x 9 MB = 108 MB/sec, 21 MB/sec x 12 fps = 252 MB/sec. But then, jump to the 20 fps and you get 180 MB/sec and 420 MB/sec. Bottom line, some of these will require buffering, even with jpegs. This isn't the end of the world. Actually, fast cards paired with even a moderate buffer are still going to be pretty impressive and just fine for most applications.



Right now, I'm more interested in HEIF files. If there are added benefits over JPEG and smaller file sizes, I might be shooting RAW/HEIF on the R5. Any idea how HEIF file sizes compare to JPEG? (I'm still betting the 20FPS is going to be JPEG or HEIF only).


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

shunsai said:


> Right now, I'm more interested in HEIF files. If there are added benefits over JPEG and smaller file sizes, I might be shooting RAW/HEIF on the R5. Any idea how HEIF file sizes compare to JPEG? (I'm still betting the 20FPS is going to be JPEG or HEIF only).



Please explain: "(I'm still betting the 20FPS is going to be JPEG or HEIF only)"
JPEG and cr3 on the R is hardly different in size. While JPEG needs to be encoded, cr3 doesn't ...


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> No it is not.


I was gonna run Perrier in my water bottle once because the bubbles make the water lighter, but then it would have increased my carbon footprint dramatically and I am all about saving the planet.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Feb 29, 2020)

The CR anthem:
Grumble on Monday
Tuesday, Wednesday
Grumble on Thursday too
Grumble on Friday
Saturday, Sunday
Grumble the whole week through


----------



## Lenscracker (Feb 29, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Experienced and level-headed photographers never forget that photography, of all the crafts and all the hobbies, is built on compromises. Are the two cards a PERFECT match in terms of performance? Of course not. Will the SD slot be useful when that nagging need for a backup possesses us, should we fear the newer CFE tech might fail? (Or the other way, slight as chances are?) Yes!
> 
> If pure speed is the priority, Canon has delivered. If backup is the priority, Canon has delivered. If saving a little money during the learning phase with this camera while waiting for CFE prices to come down is important, Canon has delivered.
> 
> ...


You have it exactly right. Somebody will be complaining no matter what construction Canon offers. What I've seen of the R5 so far pleases me a lot.


----------



## MEAllred (Feb 29, 2020)

Mark3794 said:


> Sounds great, double CFExpress would be really expensive for users


Really??? The price of the R5 and a couple new lenses is going to be more than $10,000.00! Who cares about a few bucks difference in card formats...


----------



## The Tired Photographer (Feb 29, 2020)

CFExpress + UHS-II slots is smart at this stage. UHS-II cards are fast enough for most things that anyone shoots. Though if you want to shoot 8K video you may want to buy a BIG CFExpress card.


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

MEAllred said:


> Really??? The price of the R5 and a couple new lenses is going to be more than $10,000.00! Who cares about a few bucks difference in card formats...


If the guessed average cost of the body is 3499 and two lenses (which is a couple unless you have been frequenting some saucy MMF's) that comes to about 1500-3500 + cards (SD + CFE) at 250. I get 7249 and that's probably high. Especially if one of your RF lenses is the 35.

But this is a useless debate as 'We don't know jack'.


----------



## sanj (Feb 29, 2020)

richperson said:


> I don't think this is totally accurate. It sounds like you are assuming raw to both cards, which I don't know why you would do that. If you shoot raw to the fast card and JPEG to the small card it shouldn't impact the buffer significantly should it?


For me, the only use of 2 cards is to shoot the same data on both cards. Insurance against card failure. I have been burnt before and will work only with cameras with 2 card slots and record identical information on both. I learn lessons and do not repeat my mistakes.


----------



## vjlex (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Please explain: "(I'm still betting the 20FPS is going to be JPEG or HEIF only)"
> JPEG and cr3 on the R is hardly different in size. While JPEG needs to be encoded, cr3 doesn't ...


Wow! Really? My 5d4 CR2 RAW files average around 30-70 mb each (DPRAW), whereas their JPEG counterparts range from 5-15 mb. My EOS R CR3 RAWs average around 30-35 and their JPEGs 7-9 mb. I'm not familiar enough with HEIF files, but I'm interested in seeing what kind of file sizes we might get for 45 megapixel images.

When it comes to Canon specs, there are usually some caveats. I'm just trying to imagine what they will be. 20 FPS RAW sounds better than a best case scenario. I won't be too surprised if the asterisk is that it is for a compressed file mode. I'm not claiming to have any special knowledge or understanding though, so I could be (and hopefully am) wrong.


----------



## Shaun Gibbs (Feb 29, 2020)

Fabulous. At least it will have two, one ultra fast and one relatively fast.


----------



## sanj (Feb 29, 2020)

This decision by Canon demonstrates where they place the camera. It is not their '_professional_ camera'. Which is good news, as they are going to give us their top of the line in the future. Soon I hope. 
Please do not pounce on me on the word 'professional'. This camera has great specs for professional work, but Canon will come up with even something better.


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

shunsai said:


> Wow! Really? My 5d4 CR2 RAW files average around 30-70 mb each (DPRAW), whereas their JPEG counterparts range from 5-15 mb. My EOS R CR3 RAWs average around 30-35 and their JPEGs 7-9 mb. I'm not familiar enough with HEIF files, but I'm interested in seeing what kind of file sizes we might get for 45 megapixel images.
> 
> When it comes to Canon specs, there are usually some caveats. I'm just trying to imagine what they will be. 20 FPS RAW sounds better than a best case scenario. I won't be too surprised if the asterisk is that it is for a compressed file mode. I'm not claiming to have any special knowledge or understanding though, so I could be (and hopefully am) wrong.



Yes, many of my JPEGs are 25MB while CR3s are in the low 30s ...


----------



## Shaun Gibbs (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Absolutely no sense in always having the SD card slot used with CFexpress in the other slot. The CFexpress will never obtain the advertised high speed with the SD card installed hence a waste of its write speed capabilities



Then buy a 1DX MK III. Easy.


----------



## sanj (Feb 29, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Two things.
> 
> 1 - I know I want this camera and I'm probably going to order about three and a half seconds after I find out it's available...
> 
> ...


Me too. Will pre-order. You will get it before me as I may take 5 and a half second.


----------



## Jethro (Feb 29, 2020)

A useful foretaste of the furore that will follow the (surely soon) leak on the number of MP. Regardless of what that number is ...


----------



## Cbenedict (Feb 29, 2020)

Tom W said:


> So you'll probably give up a bit of speed when using the SD UHS-II compared to the CFExpress, but that's still a pretty doggone fast card.
> 
> I would suspect that it would be backwards compatible with UHS-I SD cards as well, albeit at a more reduced buffer clearing speed.


UHS-II slots by definition are backwards compatible. You just get UHS-I speeds with UHS-I cards.


----------



## sanj (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> You have an option: Buy the 1DX III and let us who are less extreme enjoy the R5 which offers options instead of extremes.


No. You are comparing 2 different systems.


----------



## Peterm (Feb 29, 2020)

sanj said:


> For me, the only use of 2 cards is to shoot the same data on both cards. Insurance against card failure. I have been burnt before and will work only with cameras with 2 card slots and record identical information on both. I learn lessons and do not repeat my mistakes.



Have you had a SD UHS-II card fail?


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

And even with a two card slot surety we have come full circle to a card failure discussion, insert Captain Picard facepalm. Or we could just segue into 'Is film dead'?


----------



## sanj (Feb 29, 2020)

Peterm said:


> Have you had a SD UHS-II card fail?


C-Fast failed. In Jerusalem. I was shooting an assignment on 1dx2. I realized at 4 pm that the card was not working. I was to film the next day. You have no idea how I managed to get a replacement. I had to have a photographer drive from Telaviv to get me his card. It was a rough rough evening.


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

sanj said:


> C-Fast failed. In Jerusalem. I was shooting an assignment on 1dx2. I realized at 4 pm that the card was not working. I was to film the next day. You have no idea how I managed to get a replacement. I had to have a photographer drive from Telaviv to get me his card. It was a rough rough evening.


You didn't need a failure to desire a system with a backup for redundancy to have peace of mind. I could use a single slot body, I don't NEED two slots but I have them and use them creatively, not for work/insurance/security. But I would not begrudge anyone who desires such a plan. It's silly to try and find holes in anyone's workflow. Do we all have to be the same? Please god no.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Because with the slower SD installed and the CFexpress also, max speed equals to that of the slower card. One will never get dual CFexpress bus speed. Thus one would have to remove the SD card for that CFexpress bus speed


And what a chore that is.


----------



## sanj (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> You didn't need a failure to desire a system with a backup for redundancy to have peace of mind. I could use a single slot body, I don't NEED two slots but I have them and use them creatively, not for work/insurance/security. But I would not begrudge anyone who desires such a plan. It's silly to try and find holes in anyone's workflow. Do we all have to be the same? Please god no.


Please point where I put down anyone's plan? Where did I find a hole in anyone's workflow? LOL.


----------



## Shaun Gibbs (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> Never once in using the 5D3 for almost 8 years did I have issues or even think about having mixed slots. I truly love the problems of being a stills shooter over myriad of issues video people have. We win.



Agreed.


----------



## Inspired (Feb 29, 2020)

Is the cfexpress slot backward compatible with sd cards?


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

Inspired said:


> Is the cfexpress slot backward compatible with sd cards?


Totally different


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

sanj said:


> Please point where I put down anyone's plan? Where did I find a hole in anyone's workflow? LOL.


I was agreeing with you, I understand how responses to posts are typically argumentative in nature (as yours mistakenly was) I guess I did not write my feelings clear enough to convey the meaning. I apologize.


----------



## brad-man (Feb 29, 2020)

Stupid Canon! They should have included 2 UHS-ll slots _and_ 2 CFExpress slots for redumbnancy...


----------



## sanj (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> I was agreeing with you, I understand how responses to posts are typically argumentative in nature (as yours mistakenly was) I guess I did not write my feelings clear enough to convey the meaning. I apologize.


It's ok! It is the internet...


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

sanj said:


> It's ok! It is the internet...


I was being a bit sarcastic. I thought my point was crystal clear and that you should have picked up immediately that I was on your side of the discussion and just adding to it. But as with the internet you never know about context/inflection or if it is someone's 1st or other language. The problem with a keyboard? No gesticulation. Good night.


----------



## MadScotsman (Feb 29, 2020)

sanj said:


> C-Fast failed. In Jerusalem.



He didn’t ask you if you’ve ever had a CFast failure.

He asked you if you’ve ever had an SD failure.


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

brad-man said:


> Stupid Canon! They should have included 2 UHS-ll slots _and_ 2 CFExpress slots for redumbnancy...


Maybe a grip with 8 card slots of various types! (Except Memory Stick of course) lol.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Feb 29, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> But I understand what you are saying, and if you dont make photojournalism, sports or that wedding services, so it´s a good idea to shoot raw to both cards. We never know....


Yep, I was talking about my own workflow, my point was, everyone needs different setup, e.g. raw+jpeg or raw+raw etc.

As a side note. I haven't shot weddings but I've shot concerts and events and always used raw|raw in parallel. If I were shooting weddings, I'd also be using raw only. I never show unprocessed images to the clients and to anyone, unless it's for educational purposes. jpeg = unprocessed for me, because the genres/styles I shoot require artistic postprocessing.




Photojournalism/sports may be a different story.


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> SD is not going to let you pull off 12/20 FPS 40+ MP/s. It's also going to greatly slow down dumping the data onto you computer.



There are UHS-II cards that can be read at 300MB/s. What drive can have data written to it at that speed? Then, nobody can post process images at 12 / 20 fps, so what does it matter anyway?


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 29, 2020)

Expected. Thats a safe bet with memory slots.


----------



## Danglin52 (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> 1gbs per channel write speed for CFexpress
> 640mbs for gen 2 UHS II Write speed. The camera will write at max speed of the slower slot if used togerher. Has been always the case.



I don't know camera architecture, but you could potentially use a dual bus and dedicated memory to deal with the slower speed of the SD card. I doubt Canon is going to release a high end camera that degrades the performance to the lower value. I have used this approach with my 1dx II (granted with a CFast card) when I wasn't carrying a laptop on the trip. I didn't use the approach that often since I didn't want to buy a lot of CFast cards for backup: 

Buy 2 128GB Cfexpress cards
Slot 1 (Cfexpress) 128GB Write RAW
Slot 2.(SD UHS II). 128GB Write high quality Jpeg for loading on my iPad for review
At the end of the day insert fresh SD "backup" card and use Image Copy to create a backup of the 128GB Cfexpress card. You couldn't even use one of the slower UHS I cards if you had time and didn't want to buy the more expensive cards.


----------



## Danglin52 (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> You didn't need a failure to desire a system with a backup for redundancy to have peace of mind. I could use a single slot body, I don't NEED two slots but I have them and use them creatively, not for work/insurance/security. But I would not begrudge anyone who desires such a plan. It's silly to try and find holes in anyone's workflow. Do we all have to be the same? Please god no.



I am not a professional photographer, but I definitely appreciate 2 cards. I wouldn't drag around 30lbs of camera gear unless I had a desire to capture the best image possible. The last thing I want is to visit a unique location (Africa) and not go home with the great images I captured simply because a card failed. I carry the weight of two camera bodies to have a backup even if I only put a handful of shots on the 2nd body. I think anyone who spends the money for a R5, 5dIV, etc. doesn't want to loose a shot simply because a card failed.


----------



## mclaren777 (Feb 29, 2020)

This news makes me fear that the 5DV will also omit CF support.


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 29, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> I don't know camera architecture, but you could potentially use a dual bus and dedicated memory to deal with the slower speed of the SD card. I doubt Canon is going to release a high end camera that degrades the performance to the lower value. I have used this approach with my 1dx II (granted with a CFast card) when I wasn't carrying a laptop on the trip. I didn't use the approach that often since I didn't want to buy a lot of CFast cards for backup:
> 
> Buy 2 128GB Cfexpress cards
> Slot 1 (Cfexpress) 128GB Write RAW
> ...


There might be an option for HEIF format on this camera given Canon's recent push for this format. So users will have better file option other than JPEG.



mclaren777 said:


> This news makes me fear that the 5DV will also omit CF support.



CF format should be a relic of bygone era- IDE/PATA interface. With CFexpress supporting NVME over PCI-E 3.0 for current(technically still last gen with advent of PCI-E 4.0 interface) generation of industry standard interface. There are UHS-II Cards that are faster and even have higher capacity than even the fastest CF cards you can buy.


----------



## tpatana (Feb 29, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Yes....But you have to understand that when you buy a camera or a type of camera, you don´t buy "only" the camera! You have to think about the hole ecossistem! If you buy a camera that pushes the limits of writing and ask for better cards you need to accept that you will need better cards. It´s like choosing fullframe or aps-c...If you choose fullframe you know you will need to invest more in lenses. Other wise whats the point of buying a FF?
> 
> So..if you are going to buy a camera like the 1dx mkIII or the EOS R5 yes..of course you will need to think about buying new cards And if you are not ready to buy those cards...you might want to think twice about buying those cameras!
> Of course if you have already good SD cards and the R5 has a SD slot, you dont need those Cfexpress cards. But tell me, Will you buy the R5 without buying at least one cfexpress card?



Yes, but I just don't like when people say "if you can afford camera for $$$, then you have enough money for the $$$ memory cards too."

I still have to work for that money, it doesn't magically appear on my account. Especially after I already paying big bucks for the camera.

Naturally I understand the technical aspect, certain video (or still) modes require faster memory than what SD can provide, so of course Canon will add that type card slot.

I haven't ordered the 1DX3 yet, although I bought cards already as I got good deal through my friend. Those cards are expensive...


----------



## Franklyok (Feb 29, 2020)

When can I rig up with usb-c ssd?, Like bmpc. These are much cheaper and more space.


----------



## hollybush (Feb 29, 2020)

I've long thought that Canon have a different purpose in mind when they provide cameras with two slots that write at the speed of the slower slot. On a long trip, you can use these cameras with only the faster card fitted. In the evening, you can copy your photos from the fast card onto the slower card, using the second slot in the camera and the firmware function provided. You don't need to carry a laptop, but can be backed up. Then, instead of fiddling with your photos on a laptop, you file then in a pouch and go off to dinner with your non-photographic travelling companions.

If you don't worry about backups, you can fill the expensive fast card multiple times by copying the files onto the slower format. You can buy and carry multiple slower cards totalling more storage than you have on your fast card. If your slow format is SD, there's a good chance you can buy more of them on your trip.

Meanwhile, it's mainly wedding photographers who need to be able to both slots simultaneously, and for them, speed isn't thatl important. So Canon provide a mode for that too, at the slow speed.

And that, I think, is Canon's reasoning. While I might personally prefer dual CFExpress because I keep cameras for a long time and don't have a large collection of SD cards, I think their reasoning is correct for the majority of buyers.


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 29, 2020)

jam05 said:


> 640mbs for gen 2 UHS II Write speed.



What's UHS-II gen 2? Never heard of it.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 29, 2020)

MEAllred said:


> Really??? The price of the R5 and a couple new lenses is going to be more than $10,000.00!


What's wrong with your current lenses?


----------



## MrToes (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> So it is a single slot camera with a useless SD slot for absolute last resort moments.


I was really looking forward to dual c.f. slots also.


----------



## MrToes (Feb 29, 2020)

Why Canon, why? CF Express on both would bring speed to life as we know it ???


----------



## beachcolonist (Feb 29, 2020)

Because it is a bottleneck, and it prevents those with the good sense to use two CF cards. Why buy a high end camera then skimp on necessary parts? If you want cheap, just use one card.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 29, 2020)

MrToes said:


> Why Canon, why? CF Express on both would bring speed to life as we know it ???



Wait for the R1, then.

No offense to Mr. Toes, or any other poster, but this thread is bananas. I can't imagine a _less_ controversial Canon decision than this; every 5D since the mark II has had mismatched slots. It's a feature of the line by now. Deal with it, or buy something else.


----------



## Kit. (Feb 29, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> What do you think the 1DX MK III and all new EF-L -Lenses or R5 and all new RF -L Lenses , I am not sure which way to go , I am at a point where I can afford to buy either and I can't decide which to buy .


I think that if you ask such questions, you should start with something simpler. How about M6II?


----------



## wockawocka (Feb 29, 2020)

Awesome news as you can get CFexpress cards larger than 128gb. UHS-ii's seem limited to 128 (for the last three years).


----------



## Scott Smith Photo (Feb 29, 2020)

I shoot weddings, events and music concerts with a 5D3. I shoot raw to 2 32gd SD cards and swap them out often and in pairs. Only time I hit the buffer is if I get over excited at a concert and overshoot. 

I could get bigger cards but I don't need them.

I'd be interested to see if there's a CFExpress to SD adapter I can use. 

For my needs CFExpress is still too expensive but I like having the option should I need it in future.


----------



## sulla (Feb 29, 2020)

well actually, the fast SD-cards are more expensive than slow CFexpress cards (which are much faster still): I found
CFExpress: DeLOCK Flash R1550/W900: 256GB, write speed 900 MB/sec for 150 €
SD: UHS-II: Toshiba Exceria Pro N502 R270/W260: 256GB, write speed 260 MB/sec for 300 €

So, its a design decision by Canon which I cannot understand. It may only be that it is space constraints.

By the way, for my 5D3 I have 128GB CF + SD cards and I record dual RAW to both cards. I find the SD more convenient to remove in order to put into a card reader on the computer. With the R5 I probably would transfer the RAW files by WiFi.


----------



## sulla (Feb 29, 2020)

I really would never spend a thought on the price of memory cards, while buying a camera like the R5.
Let's hope Canon is sane and equips the R5 with dual CFexpress...


----------



## .jan (Feb 29, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.


Thanks for your opinion. Care to share your insider knowledge about pricing with us? Apparently you know a lot about it.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 29, 2020)

While I like symmetric systems the different cards might be a good move for me: I have some notebooks which have built in SD card readers and it's great to have direct compatibility for all the standard stuff (stills, p1080 and p2160 video) - and if I really need the "fast stuff" I have the option of CF express.

Maybe it is a bottleneck in the controllers to: Writing insanely high data rates to two devices simultanously isnt't twice the computing power but maybe 20% more!


----------



## sulla (Feb 29, 2020)

I looked up the specs, UHS-II can theoretically go up to 312 MB/s (half duplex, i.e. read or write).


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 29, 2020)

sulla said:


> I looked up the specs, UHS-II can theoretically go up to 312 MB/s (half duplex, i.e. read or write).



CFExpress currently come in 1GB/s, 2GB/s, and 4GB/s max theoretical speeds. Type A are sized with SD cards and should be happy at 1GB/s. The R5 seems to be getting the common type B card format which currently supports up to 2 GB/s. SD express and CFE Type A may end up being the same thing, but that is pure speculation on my part. 

And back OT, the slow SD card is not a backup for some shooters but is perfectly fine for others. Something had to give on this camera, giving us 12/20 FPS was too good to be true for sports and wildlife. So for those disappointed in the SD slot like myself, I invite you to look forward to the R1 and whatever big whites will be launched with it.


----------



## Joules (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> And back OT, the slow SD card is not a backup for some shooters but is perfectly fine for others. Something had to give on this camera, giving us 12/20 FPS was too good to be true for sports and wildlife. So for those disappointed in the SD slot like myself, I invite you to look forward to the R1 and whatever big whites will be launched with it.


That's a good summary on this.

With dual CFexpress they would have had to give it the same unlimited burst shooting as the 1DX III and maybe the folks who think the R5 will cost upwards of 5k a reason to do so. Although who knows, they could write to the fast card and copy the files to the SD in the background between bursts. But I doubt they will, this is Canon after all.

And we don't know just how much cheaper it is for Canon to use the SD slot. The way it is now, the R5 looks like a thing that can be picked up by an existing EF user without no extra costs beyond the body.


----------



## Quackator (Feb 29, 2020)

sanj said:


> C-Fast failed. In Jerusalem. I was shooting an assignment on 1dx2. I realized at 4 pm that the card was not working. I was to film the next day. You have no idea how I managed to get a replacement.



I have no idea how in the world you went on a job with just one 
single card - which would be much more dramatic to me than 
a single slot!


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

Grown children having tantrums over media cards. Go buy something else or build your own got dang dream machine for under $4k. Pathetic.


----------



## BillB (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> And back OT, the slow SD card is not a backup for some shooters but is perfectly fine for others. Something had to give on this camera, giving us 12/20 FPS was too good to be true for sports and wildlife. So for those disappointed in the SD slot like myself, I invite you to look forward to the R1 and whatever big whites will be launched with it.



Actually, it may give us 12/20 FPS for sports and wildlife, but maybe not with a back up. A lot of overwrought speculation about stuff that we are not sure about. In any case, it is all crying over spilt milk. The R5 is not going to have two CF Express card slots, and it bothers some of us more than others.


----------



## Go Wild (Feb 29, 2020)

BillB said:


> Actually, it may give us 12/20 FPS for sports and wildlife, but maybe not with a back up. A lot of overwrought speculation about stuff that we are not sure about. In any case, it is all crying over spilt milk. The R5 is not going to have two CF Express card slots, and it bothers some of us more than others.



Camera will be perfectly fine for wildlife! What can bother in not having 2 cfexpress is about video recording and need to use 2 different media. I am not a fan of it. Never liked in the !dxmkII, I will not like now. But I understand Canon´s choice. And it´s not a dealbreaker to me. At all!

A little bit off topic, but i keep thinking in the EOS R6. So at the point, we have a registered camera (the EOS R5), we have a development announcement and the camera is going to hit the streets in July. But no words on the EOS R6 that supposedly will come in June prior to the EOS R5?? Nothing about the EOS R6?
I am on a big decision here...Should I pair the 1dxmkiii with the eos r5 or go full to the R sistem? One thing is for sure...2020 is going to be a hell of a year to my wallet!!!


----------



## koenkooi (Feb 29, 2020)

Joules said:


> [..]. Although who knows, they could write to the fast card and copy the files to the SD in the background between bursts. But I doubt they will, this is Canon after all.
> [..]



A deep buffer means lots and lots of RAM, which is both expensive and power hungry. I would guess that Canon reduced the amount of RAM to make it cheaper and last longer on a single charge. So the in-memory conversion of RAW to jpeg/heif would slow down things a lot. A way around this would be to generate the jpg/heif images from the RAW files after they are stored on the CFe. That wouldn't impact burst speed, but it would make people with card-failure fears a bit twitchy.


----------



## vjlex (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> JPEG and cr3 on the R is hardly different in size. While JPEG needs to be encoded, cr3 doesn't ...





joestopper said:


> Yes, many of my JPEGs are 25MB while CR3s are in the low 30s ...


I've never experienced my 5D4 JPEGs being more than 25% of its _corresponding_ RAW file's size, and the EOS R JPEGs I have are roughly 30% of their corresponding CR3 files. My JPEGS are always set to the highest quality setting. I don't see how you're getting JPEGs that are 75% or more of their corresponding RAW file.

Can anyone else confirm this? The only time I remember seeing JPEGs comparable in size to RAW is if the JPEG was created later in camera or in software on the computer.


----------



## SecureGSM (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> If you are shooting the camera at full speed and want a backup you are out of luck with that SD card slowing things down. We don’t know exactly how bad it’ll limit the camera, but surely it has to in spme way given ho many pixels it is pushing. If on the other hand you are under 10 frames a minute at a wedding or the lik, it won’t effect you in the slightest.



++++ We don’t know exactly how bad it’ll limit the camera, but surely... 

A.M.: But surely, we don't know exactly how bad.. so... modern *UHS-II SD card read write speed *is : ≤ 312 MB/s 
with average RAW file at around 45-55Mb per file, it would take around 0.25 second to write. so.. 4 frames per second. not 10 per minute..
Still feel that this is a useless solution?


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 29, 2020)

shunsai said:


> I've never experienced my 5D4 JPEGs being more than 25% of its _corresponding_ RAW file's size, and the EOS R JPEGs I have are roughly 30% of their corresponding CR3 files. My JPEGS are always set to the highest quality setting. I don't see how you're getting JPEGs that are 75% or more of their corresponding RAW file.
> 
> Can anyone else confirm this? The only time I remember seeing JPEGs comparable in size to RAW is if I created the JPEG later in camera or in software on the computer.



I haven't seen that too but maybe you can tweak the picture styles to do that for you: High sharpening, high contrast, high color saturation that combined with highly detailed stuff - sand, crops, forests without sky might push jpeg to its limits of compression: Each pixel is different from the other and hence you have Imagesize ~ Number of pixels x 1 Byte.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 29, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> ++++ We don’t know exactly how bad it’ll limit the camera, but surely...
> 
> A.M.: But surely, we don't know exactly how bad.. so... modern *UHS-II SD card read write speed *is : ≤ 312 MB/s
> with average RAW file at around 45-55Mb per file, it would take around 0.25 second to write. so.. 4 frames per second. not 10 per minute..
> Still feel that this is a useless solution?



People needing to push 12 - 20 FPS for hundreds of frames are affected. People shooting 10 frames a minute are not affected. So yes, to the extreme I am on it is useless, to someone that sets up a landscape at 1 frame a hour its not going to effect them, and wedding photographers don't spray ether so they wont be affected in the slightest. Regardless, its likely I am waiting for a R1, and there aren't any lenses available for me on the R system yet.


----------



## peters (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Good news for still shooters since CFExpress has no value for stills (for a few of these cards one can better buy an RF lens)


20fps with probably 60mb - 1,2gb/s
This can be written without any buffering to the CFE card. But it means constant buffering and lags on a SD card.


----------



## SecureGSM (Feb 29, 2020)

peters said:


> 20fps with probably 60mb - 1,2gb/s
> This can be written without any buffering to the CFE card. But it means constant buffering and lags on a SD card.



do you shoot regularly @20 fps,


Codebunny said:


> People needing to push 12 - 20 FPS for hundreds of frames are affected. People shooting 10 frames a minute are not affected. So yes, to the extreme I am on it is useless, to someone that sets up a landscape at 1 frame a hour its not going to effect them, and wedding photographers don't spray ether so they wont be affected in the slightest. Regardless, its likely I am waiting for a R1, and there aren't any lenses available for me on the R system yet.



can you please fix your maths there? thank you. with 4 frames per seconds you are up to 240 frames per minute. not 10 frames per minute. big difference.
and when you need 20 fps, for a short while or for hi res video - switch to a single card writing. this is far from being useless. let's admit and move on.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 29, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> can you please fix your maths there? thank you.



My maths is fine, thanks! And I don't think a a landscape photographer will need to take 240 frames in a minute.


----------



## SecureGSM (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> My maths is fine, thanks! And I don't think a a landscape photographer will need to take 240 frames in a minute.


You said: People shooting 10 frames a minute are not affected. 

A.M.: said: People shooting 240 frames per minute are no affected.

both statements are correct, however you implied a limitation of not be able to shoot at faster than 10 frames per minute. Which is way less than 240 per min.

++++ I don't think a a landscape photographer will need to take 240 frames in a minute. 

A.M. : you are obviously correct 
so, Landscape, portraiture, events, weddings, concerts, real estate, architectural, interior, product photography and macro - are unaffected. 
fast action (wildlife, sports, surf, BIF) - short bursts or switch to writing to a single card... alternatively, 1D body is the king.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 29, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> both statements are correct, however you implied a limitation of not be able to shoot at faster than 10 frames per minute. Which is way less than 240 per min.



An implication of any modern camera being limited to 10FP/m would be illogical. I was describing shooting styles. And aye, a 1D body seems to be the way to go. There are no RF lenses for serious wildlife out nor announced(The 100-500 will be good for walking about, but it's not a big white).


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> People needing to push 12 - 20 FPS for hundreds of frames are affected. People shooting 10 frames a minute are not affected. So yes, to the extreme I am on it is useless, to someone that sets up a landscape at 1 frame a hour its not going to effect them, and wedding photographers don't spray ether so they wont be affected in the slightest. Regardless, its likely I am waiting for a R1, and there aren't any lenses available for me on the R system yet.


You tickle my funny bone.
You'll wait on the R1, which will have significantly less mega pixels, because of the media card. Obviously resolution is less important to you than cards. Also, there are no lenses for you yet. So why all the vitriolic angst over the media card setup when this: 1. Obviously isn't the camera you want. 2. No lenses you want are yet available anyway? It's about like watching an unsuspecting guy knock over a bee hive, then flailing about in a clover field. Entertaining as hell.


----------



## drama (Feb 29, 2020)

Surely it will make sense that the images shoot to dual card if you want that (with a slight slow down for buffering perhaps, but depends on the processor and memory) and that the CFExpress is for all the heavy video stuff in the camera?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> You tickle my funny bone.
> You'll wait on the R1, which will have significantly less mega pixels, because of the media card. Obviously resolution is less important to you than cards. Also, there are no lenses for you yet. So why all the vitriolic angst over the media card setup when this: 1. Obviously isn't the camera you want. 2. No lenses you want are yet available anyway? It's about like watching an unsuspecting guy knock over a bee hive, then flailing about in a clover field. Entertaining as hell.



20MP will be enough, even with the 18MP I had on the 7d I never . The R5 was/is tempting due to its burst, but for my wants i was looking at is a possible alternative to the 1d3. The end goal is a 200-400 and/or 600mm f/4, with the best body I can attach it too. I am willing to wait for RF versions of these, and if the R5 is good enough it could serve as a backup body.

My goals are clear and right in the open. The reported R5 specs are 99% of the way there, but if I buy it I know it is a single slot camera for my needs and I need to see its grip too.

The decision for me will be made in about 18 months, might even stay on EF. It’s not like i am going to replace the lens or body I buy for a decade later.


----------



## Roy Hunte (Feb 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> You tickle my funny bone.
> You'll wait on the R1, which will have significantly less mega pixels, because of the media card. Obviously resolution is less important to you than cards. Also, there are no lenses for you yet. So why all the vitriolic angst over the media card setup when this: 1. Obviously isn't the camera you want. 2. No lenses you want are yet available anyway? It's about like watching an unsuspecting guy knock over a bee hive, then flailing about in a clover field. Entertaining as hell.


That analogy is entertaining


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

Most folks will whine over anything and everything, I can imagine a 28 page complaint over strap lug placement.


----------



## docsmith (Feb 29, 2020)

I am a bit hesitant to jump back into this, but most posts I read are falling into two camps:

Camp "A": This CR2 rumor, if true, confirms two card slots (some are excited about even this) and as CF Express and UHS II are very good for many conditions, this continues to indicate the R5 is a significant step up for the "5" lineup (people are overjoyed)!

Camp "B": Crunching numbers and UHS II SD cards cannot keep up with the higher end specs (12/20 fps, high end video) and it will impact certain styles of shooters (RAW to both cards, people that shot cards in sequence so as not to stop the action, etc). This group, also pointing out that most SD cards people already have won't come close to keeping up with the higher end specs (mine are all UHS-I), therefore purchasing new, high end UHS-II cards, which are basically in the same price range as CF Express cards will be needed. So, spending the same money, on something that is still incapable of the higher end specs.

So, Camp A is about continued improvement over the EOS R and 5DIV. Camp B is about the eye-popping specs we have seen we now know will be somewhat limited.

Interesting to me, both Camps are correct. Just the perspectives are different. Yet, some of the critisisms I am seeing of Camp B...seriously? Yes, the R5 will still be a great camera, but this is the first sign that it will be limited compared to the eye popping specs we've seen.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> Most folks will whine over anything and everything, I can imagine a 28 page complaint over strap lug placement.



People get disappointed about things they where looking forward too, it’s human nature. We have something that is almost perfect, so the niggles will be over the smaller things.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Feb 29, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> why is a UHS-II SD slot suddenly useless?


I agree, I use an UHS-II 64gb SD card in my EOSR and its fast so no buffering. Yes, its not as fast as CF express but then unless you blasting away at 20fps, the SD card should manage and is half the price of CF Express. Keeping the SD card slot is definitely not making it suddenly useless, it makes it cost effective for people who already have UHS-II Cards.

I'm hoping when this is available for pre orders, they do a similar offer to the EOS 1D X MKIII and include a CF Express card and reader as buying both could be upwards of £300 for a decent sized card.


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> People get disappointed about things they where looking forward too, it’s human nature. We have something that is almost perfect, so the niggles will be over the smaller things.


We have nothing. We know very little. Just a exercise in raising blood pressure. It's a shell under acrylic at WPPI.


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

shunsai said:


> I've never experienced my 5D4 JPEGs being more than 25% of its _corresponding_ RAW file's size, and the EOS R JPEGs I have are roughly 30% of their corresponding CR3 files. My JPEGS are always set to the highest quality setting. I don't see how you're getting JPEGs that are 75% or more of their corresponding RAW file.
> 
> Can anyone else confirm this? The only time I remember seeing JPEGs comparable in size to RAW is if the JPEG was created later in camera or in software on the computer.


 
OK
"Can anyone else confirm this? The only time I remember seeing JPEGs comparable in size to RAW is if the JPEG was created later in camera or in software on the computer."

My mistake: I did compare to JPEGs generated in LR with highest quality not in body (I was not aware that this is any different as I shoot raw only)


----------



## brad-man (Feb 29, 2020)

I recall being underwhelmed that the SD slot in my 5DIV was limited to UHS-1. I got over it...


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Feb 29, 2020)

I write 400 mbps video to relatively inexpensive UHS-II cards all the time and I’ve never had a problem. Seems like a lot of fuss over nothing to me. If anything I would have preferred the ability to write directly to external SSDs but for some reason we can’t get that. Not sure why.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Feb 29, 2020)

docsmith said:


> I am a bit hesitant to jump back into this, but most posts I read are falling into two camps:
> 
> Camp "A": This CR2 rumor, if true, confirms two card slots (some are excited about even this) and as CF Express and UHS II are very good for many conditions, this continues to indicate the R5 is a significant step up for the "5" lineup (people are overjoyed)!
> 
> ...


I agree, although the prices of UHS-II and CF Express cards are not in the same price range. I have just been looking as I want new cards anyway to supplement my existing UHS-11card and 64GB cards from Sandisk are £94 for UHS-II and £174 for CF Express so almost double the price. The UHS-11 card I have whilst not matching the 800mb/s write speed of the CF Express equivelant is still pretty fast at 260mb/s and is specifically designed for 4K video capture. I think its a reasonable compromise and recognises existing customers won't want to buy all new cards rendering their current one's to the bin.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> Most folks will whine over anything and everything, I can imagine a 28 page complaint over strap lug placement.


The biggest complainers are non-buyers in the first place. One of the biggest complaints about the R is where the on/off switch is.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> I agree, although the prices of UHS-II and CF Express cards are not in the same price range. I have just been looking as I want new cards anyway to supplement my existing UHS-11card and 64GB cards from Sandisk are £94 for UHS-II and £174 for CF Express so almost double the price. The UHS-11 card I have whilst not matching the 800mb/s write speed of the CF Express equivelant is still pretty fast at 260mb/s and is specifically designed for 4K video capture. I think its a reasonable compromise and recognises existing customers won't want to buy all new cards rendering their current one's to the bin.


Believe me, if there were no SD slot there would be people complaining over that too. I get that not everyone can be pleased, but there comes a point where the complaints are over wrought outrage for the sake of outrage. If I were to buy an R5 (huge if) I wouldn't be happy that I had to spend on a CFE card, but I wouldn't be crying on the forum about it page after page. It's the same mental hysteria that gives us the volumes and technical arguments over 1/2 stop of DR. 3,2,1...


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

peters said:


> 20fps with probably 60mb - 1,2gb/s
> This can be written without any buffering to the CFE card. But it means constant buffering and lags on a SD card.




But people who claim stills are 20FPS *continuously* are not doing stills. Thats a video ...


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

brad-man said:


> I recall being underwhelmed that the SD slot in my 5DIV was limited to UHS-1. I got over it...


Were you still able to get the "moment"?


----------



## canonmike (Feb 29, 2020)

richperson said:


> I'm glad they have two different slots. The small slot for JPEG backups is nice. Also nice in those times when you want to record raw on the main card, but JPEG on the small card for ability to hand the card immediately to someone with a reader to print/transfer the file. If you had two CFExpress slots then you would have to bring the bulky reader with you or plug to the camera.
> [
> I thought Canon planned on solving this dilemma with the introduction in Apr 2020 of their new Cloud Platform??


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Believe me, if there were no SD slot there would be people complaining over that too. I get that not everyone can be pleased, but there comes a point where the complaints are over wrought outrage for the sake of outrage. If I were to buy an R5 (huge if) I wouldn't be happy that I had to spend on a CFE card, but I wouldn't be crying on the forum about it page after page. It's the same mental hysteria that gives us the volumes and technical arguments over 1/2 stop of DR. 3,2,1...



People are not happy with the 2 heterogeneous cards slots, sadly.
How about 3? Then the fight were: Should it be 2 CFE and 1 SD or 2 SD and 1 CFE --> also no good.
Thats why we need 4 card slots: 2 CFE and 2 SD, or(?), wait a second ....


----------



## Kiton (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> So it is a single slot camera with a useless SD slot for absolute last resort moments.



There is an old saying that goes something like this:

I stopped explaining to myself to others when I realized others only understood from their own level of perception.

An SD card may be totally useless to you, but incredibly valuable to others!

There are many many scenarios where an SD card is indispensable!
Maybe you don't have a work flow that requires it, but I and many other do.

I always carry a CF to SD card adapter in my bag for use with my 2 1dx mk 2 bodies.

I can live very well with a SD U2 for jpegs and CFexpress for RAW.

If this is true, Thank you Canon!


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> People are not happy with the 2 heterogeneous cards slots, sadly.
> How about 3? Then the fight were: Should it be 2 CFE and 1 SD or 2 SD and 1 CFE --> also no good.
> Thats why we need 4 card slots: 2 CFE and 2 SD, or(?), wait a second ....


I'm just pissed there isn't a 1TB SSD.  No way am I buying the R5 now!

But seriously, although the R series is new territory, I was 99% sure there would be mismatched cards on the camera at this price level. Still, this is going to be one heck of a camera. It would be nice if there were two matched cards, but everyone had to be pretty sure they wouldn't be. I am quite shocked the 1DX Mark III has two matching slots.

Joe, which of your three lenses do you find yourself using most?


----------



## docsmith (Feb 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> I agree, although the prices of UHS-II and CF Express cards are not in the same price range. I have just been looking as I want new cards anyway to supplement my existing UHS-11card and 64GB cards from Sandisk are £94 for UHS-II and £174 for CF Express so almost double the price. The UHS-11 card I have whilst not matching the 800mb/s write speed of the CF Express equivelant is still pretty fast at 260mb/s and is specifically designed for 4K video capture. I think its a reasonable compromise and recognises existing customers won't want to buy all new cards rendering their current one's to the bin.


Sure...
On price, what I looked at was B&H an online store here in the US. But I saw 128 GB Sandisk Extreme Pro UHS II card for $199 and then a Sandisk Extreme Pro Type B 128 GB CFExpress card for $259. So, quick search, but I tried to compare like by like and consider that to be similar. I am not surprised at all that it may vary brand to brand and country to country.

On the existing customers buying new cards, this part I wonder about. For example, I shoot the 5DIV. It's SD slot is UHS-I. So, all my cards are UHS-I and max out at <95 MB/sec. Looking at it, the R, RP, 90D, M6 II are all UHS-II, but are also backwards compatible. So, it really depends on what you are coming from and if you had already invested in high end SD cards (I suspect most bought the less expensive SD card types). But this idea that you can take any SD card and slap it in the R5, sure it will work, but you won't get the higher end performance. That, and people like me have piles of UHS-1 SD and CF cards. If I am scrapping my entire set of memory cards, personally, I would prefer to upgrade to a single card type that is the highest performance for the money. In this case, for the 128 GB Sandisk Extreme Pro from B&H, that is the CFExpress. 

As for what Canon did. Sure, I see the logic. They've always had different types of cards in their dual card slots, the SD slot is as universal as it gets and the CFExpress is somewhat new. The UHS-II is consistent with many of their recent cameras. There is a lot of logic there. I could have also seen the logic of two CFExpress card slots as they did in the 1DX III. 

But, to a large extent, this is simply learning about the R5, assuming this CR2 rumor is correct. But if true, I now know the R5 has a CFExpress and UHS II card slot with all the great things and limitations that entails.


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I'm just pissed there isn't a 1TB SSD.  No way am I buying the R5 now!
> 
> But seriously, although the R series is new territory, I was 99% sure there would be mismatched cards on the camera at this price level. Still, this is going to be one heck of a camera. It would be nice if there were two matched cards, but everyone had to be pretty sure they wouldn't be. I am quite shocked the 1DX Mark III has two matching slots.
> 
> Joe, which of your three lenses do you find yourself using most?



"I am quite shocked the 1DX Mark III has two matching slots."
Why? That makes sense as it is the full pro gear ...


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> "I am quite shocked the 1DX Mark III has two matching slots."
> Why? That makes sense as it is the full pro gear ...



"Joe, which of your three lenses do you find yourself using most?"

I am using the 28-70 most of the time. I do not see a big difference in IQ between this and the two primes. Anyway, for all portrait work I use the 85. But for street or even landscape I am using the 28-70. I see myself using the 50 quite rarely these days (if the 28-70 had been the first lens released I would not have bought the 50)


----------



## Bert63 (Feb 29, 2020)

(So lemme just take a quick second and review my internal conversation)

R5 Camera body (just say it Bob) $4K

100-500L (yes, it's a turd on the long end at 7.1 but you know you're going to buy it anyway) $3K

RF 1.4X (because 560 isn't enough now and the 500mm F4 is too big) $500

CFE 512 GB (because if there is anything within an arm's reach that is faster than what you have now you'll buy it) $600

Jeebus. A million here and a million there and pretty soon we're talking about serious money.


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

Bahrd said:


> Why not to use an internal super-fast solid drive (with a few capacity variants) instead of an SD card slot?
> A CFE card would nicely work like a backup then...



Because it requires lots of energy, drains your battery fast.


----------



## goldenhusky (Feb 29, 2020)

Be happy Canon did not add 2 SD UHS-II cards like Sony did (One of the reason I haven't bought the A7r4 yet, obviosly the second reason is EOS R5). Personally I would have liked dual CFExpress cards but I was expecting this to be CFExpress and SD UHS-II. I just did a comparison in B&H website on the price between 256 GB SD UHS-II cards and 256GB CFE cards. I found that if someone is going to buy a 256GB SD UHS-II V90 rated cards the price difference is not that much. But one were to compare 256GB SD UHS-II V60 Vs 256BG CF cards then the SD cards are less than half the price. My theory is that the more a memory card format is being used more manufacturers will jump to make that format which will increase competition and bring down the price.

I was going to buy A7R4 and then the R5 rumors and announcement came out. So changed my mind to wait for the release of R5. Depends on at what level Canon' cripple hammer is at play I will buy one of these cameras. I have EF lenses, E mount lenses and RF lenses as well. I guess I will continue to shoot both Canon and Sony systems.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> "I am quite shocked the 1DX Mark III has two matching slots."
> Why? That makes sense as it is the full pro gear ...


Because the 1DX II doesn't. It is CFast/CF


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Feb 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Believe me, if there were no SD slot there would be people complaining over that too. I get that not everyone can be pleased, but there comes a point where the complaints are over wrought outrage for the sake of outrage. If I were to buy an R5 (huge if) I wouldn't be happy that I had to spend on a CFE card, but I wouldn't be crying on the forum about it page after page. It's the same mental hysteria that gives us the volumes and technical arguments over 1/2 stop of DR. 3,2,1...


I agree, sometimes I wonder why people post as it seems the comments are there just to make a comment and are not really thought through. Canon make their decisions based on sound research and feedback from customers. What will be will be lol


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Only interested in animals. Weddings would not even remotely pay enough money to be worth it, major respect to anyone that has the patients to photograph a wedding.


Not quite sure I follow this? I get that it depends what you charge for a wedding, but around me, the better gals/guys are at £3-6k per wedding, and booked most weekends, and even some mid-weeks too. (Seasonality still plays own a bit, but 'off-season' weddings are increasingly popular too). Not sure what wildlife photography pays you upwards of £250k a year (gross)? (But interested to find out  )


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 29, 2020)

StoicalEtcher said:


> Not quite sure I follow this? I get that it depends what you charge for a wedding, but around me, the better gals/guys are at £3-6k per wedding, and booked most weekends, and even some mid-weeks too. (Seasonality still plays own a bit, but 'off-season' weddings are increasingly popular too). Not sure what wildlife photography pays you upwards of £250k a year (gross)? (But interested to find out  )


Wildlife is a hobby. The three weddings I did do where such a hassle, the first one the groom died a month later. Compared to my day job and even product photography, it was just way to much work and stress with very little reward. I earn a £75k a year as a programmer and £15k on a good year for photography. It would be interesting to build up photography as a business, but I wont be pushed into the stress of doing a wedding again.


----------



## David Hull (Feb 29, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Glad ti will have an SD slot. The CFExpress cards are insanely overpriced. Hopefully, the price will come down in time. What kind of card reader do you need to read the things?


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> I agree, sometimes I wonder why people post as it seems the comments are there just to make a comment and are not really thought through. Canon make their decisions based on sound research and feedback from customers. What will be will be lol


I post here because this is my social life. In other words, I have no life outside of CR.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Wildlife is a hobby. The three weddings I did do where such a hassle, the first one the groom died a month later. Compared to my day job and even product photography, it was just way to much work and stress with very little reward. I earn a £75k a year as a programmer and £15k on a good year for photography. It would be interesting to build up photography as a business, but I wont be pushed into the stress of doing a wedding again.


Aah, gotcha. 

And I wouldn't disagree - I don't do weddings myself (well, done about three in my whole professional career - as 'favours for mates' type things - having been requested rather than volunteering): they don't do it for me either, and I agree with the stress levels. 

The pro wedding-photogs I know though get turned on by the buzz/stress of it, in the main, and probably wouldn't do anything else. They also can turn in a pretty penny - if you are good at it and build your contacts, it can be seriously good business.

Wildlife on the other hand is much more pleasant, and what I also do as a way of getting away from the 'day' job. Good luck and happy hunting!

Cheers


----------



## docsmith (Feb 29, 2020)

Just one last bit before I head out for the day...but we've been talking about the theoretical speeds, just also pointing out, theory almost never holds up...here are some tests of UHS-II with the EOS-R. Write speeds maxed out at ~180 MB/sec. 





Canon EOS R Fastest SD Cards UHS-II vs UHS-I comparison of Write Speed in the EOS R Mirrorless Digital Camera - Camera Memory Speed Comparison & Performance tests for SD and CF cards


Canon EOS R SD card speed comparison. Recommended memory cards for the fullframe mirrorless digital camera for fast continuous shooting. Which Secure Digital memory cards to buy for the EOS-R.




www.cameramemoryspeed.com


----------



## AaronT (Feb 29, 2020)

Bennymiata said:


> I think Canon has done the right thing.
> A UHS II card can easily record 450mb/sec on my R.
> Forcing people to buy 2 CFExpress cards for their new camera would hold some people back from buying as they are expensive.


Absolutely Amazing! Specially since read speed on UHS II maxes out at 300 mb/sec and write speeds are always lower. Hypothetical max transfer speed on UHS II is 312 mb/sec. Your Canon R must have been sprinkled with some magic Pixy Dust!


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 29, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Aye, I can imagine the camera runs heavily crippled on a 300 MB/s card vs the 1200MB/s write of the slowest CFExpress card. It’ll likely reduce a lot of the video modes and greatly reduce the frame rate.


Then use only the CFE card when shooting video.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Feb 29, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> Then use only the CFE card when shooting video.


I don't shoot video. Wildlife stills only.


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I post here because this is my social life. In other words, I have no life outside of CR.


Yet you have more sense than most.


----------



## davo (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> Most folks will whine over anything and everything, I can imagine a 28 page complaint over strap lug placement.


Oh THAT thing! Dont get me started! Grrrrrr.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> Yet you have more sense than most.


Hold off on that. I've not seen an R5 yet and my R isn't a year old. I'll probably rent an R5 around Christmas if Mrs. Claus thinks I am worthy. Once that happens, common sense will probably not exist. Mrs. Claus wants out of the apartment and into a house. Maybe she'll believe the oft told story that I need another piece of gear to start making money at it......... NAH!


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Hold off on that. I've not seen an R5 yet and my R isn't a year old. I'll probably rent an R5 around Christmas if Mrs. Claus thinks I am worthy. Once that happens, common sense will probably not exist. Mrs. Claus wants out of the apartment and into a house. Maybe she'll believe the oft told story that I need another piece of gear to start making money at it......... NAH!


See you DO have sense because you include her in the process unlike these guys who hide gold clubs, lenses, new carbon bike wheelsets and anything unlike a boat from the spouse.


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

slclick said:


> See you DO have sense because you include her in the process unlike these guys who hide gold clubs, lenses, new carbon bike wheelsets and anything unlike a boat from the spouse.


After 37 years it is impossible to hide anything. It would be a fruitless pursuit, my friend. She knows before I know.


----------



## sanj (Feb 29, 2020)

Inspired said:


> Is the cfexpress slot backward compatible with sd cards?


Nope.


Quackator said:


> I have no idea how in the world you went on a job with just one
> single card - which would be much more dramatic to me than
> a single slot!


Are you so assumptions with everything in life? I had more cards but did not want to shoot with just one card. And what about my second body which was to shoot at another location?


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Feb 29, 2020)

AaronT said:


> Absolutely Amazing! Specially since read speed on UHS II maxes out at 300 mb/sec and write speeds are always lower. Hypothetical max transfer speed on UHS II is 312 mb/sec. Your Canon R must have been sprinkled with some magic Pixy Dust!


Wow, Id love to know what UHS-II card you have as my Sandisk is registered with a max 260mb/sec used in an EOS R?


----------



## Adam Shutter Bug (Feb 29, 2020)

unfocused said:


> More likely a BG-E22 type grip. Would be great if it used the same grip.



as someone who has the grip on my EOSR I would like to think that it would be compatible. It would be smart. The R5seems to have same body shape just different buttons


----------



## Gti5notrkt (Feb 29, 2020)

Just a thought. If the write speed on a CFE card is so much higher why not duplicate from the CFE->SD card AFTER the shot burst vs. dual write? This would ensure data redundancy across two cards and at the same time not cripple the FPS. If a user chooses to only have an SD as primary then this function would be disabled.


----------



## Adam Shutter Bug (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Thebody of the R5 has slightly different dimensions --> BG-E22 will not fit


Has that been confirmed ?


----------



## Quackator (Feb 29, 2020)

Adam Shutter Bug said:


> Has that been confirmed ?



No need to confirm the obvious.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 29, 2020)

Just had a look at CFE prices and holy sh!t, so a 256gb costs half of a brand new R, pretty shocking....


----------



## AaronT (Feb 29, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Wow, Id love to know what UHS-II card you have as my Sandisk is registered with a max 260mb/sec used in an EOS R?


I was talking about the MAX Speed of UHSII cards, not necessarily in the R. As far as max read speed of 300 mb/sec look at https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...ces_ddsdg2000128_128gb_sdxc_2000x_memory.html


----------



## Ozarker (Feb 29, 2020)

Viggo said:


> Just had a look at CFE prices and holy sh!t, so a 256gb costs half of a brand new R, pretty shocking....


Kinda catches you in the boo boo, don't it?  Glad that camera is just a twinkle in my eye right now. I would never need more than 32gb, maybe 64gb. The video, sports and wildlife guys are going to feel a sting. 128gb are going for $199 at Adorama. 1TB for $899 I think.


----------



## dwarven (Feb 29, 2020)

joestopper said:


> People are not happy with the 2 heterogeneous cards slots, sadly.
> How about 3? Then the fight were: Should it be 2 CFE and 1 SD or 2 SD and 1 CFE --> also no good.
> Thats why we need 4 card slots: 2 CFE and 2 SD, or(?), wait a second ....



Personally, I was hoping for a 3GB/s NVMe SSD magazine with a 30 round capacity.


----------



## navastronia (Feb 29, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Kinda catches you in the boo boo, don't it?  Glad that camera is just a twinkle in my eye right now. I would never need more than 32gb, maybe 64gb. The video, sports and wildlife guys are going to feel a sting. 128gb are going for $199 at Adorama. 1TB for $899 I think.



Yeah, I really want to know what those R5 file sizes are going to be like. I'm shooting a lot of JPG right now with my RP (partly because there are no camera-matching RAW profiles in Lightroom), so this is rarely an issue, but I think I may need to upgrade to 64 or 128 GB cards when I have a camera with over 40 MP.


----------



## reef58 (Feb 29, 2020)

I guess the question is which camera is giving the complainers two CFE cards they so desperately need? The 1DX3 and?


----------



## joestopper (Feb 29, 2020)

Adam Shutter Bug said:


> Has that been confirmed ?





Adam Shutter Bug said:


> Has that been confirmed ?



"Confirmed" as it is apparent from side-by-side images (somewhere posted within the past to weeks here on CR) of the R and R5: It shows that the distance from the left side of the mount to the left side of the housing is larger in the R5.


----------



## JoeDavid (Feb 29, 2020)

If the camera has a high speed usb-c port they could also allow an external SSD as a recording option. BlackMagic Design‘s newer Pocket Cinema cameras have this option so it’s not out of the question if they are on Canon’s radar.


----------



## neurorx (Feb 29, 2020)

If the R5 is rumored to be 45 MP at 20fps, is anyone concerned this will lead to a buffer issue for an SD card? That’s more lifting than the 1DX3.


----------



## BurningPlatform (Feb 29, 2020)

AaronT said:


> Absolutely Amazing! Specially since read speed on UHS II maxes out at 300 mb/sec and write speeds are always lower. Hypothetical max transfer speed on UHS II is 312 mb/sec. Your Canon R must have been sprinkled with some magic Pixy Dust!


And all you people should be a bit more precise. 1 B(yte) = 8 b(its).


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Feb 29, 2020)

AaronT said:


> I was talking about the MAX Speed of UHSII cards, not necessarily in the R. As far as max read speed of 300 mb/sec look at https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...ces_ddsdg2000128_128gb_sdxc_2000x_memory.html


yup, the max speed of the Sandisk Extreme Pro 64GB read speed is up to 300mb/s and write speed of 260mb/s which is the important one as that is what determines how fast the buffer fills up. Thats why I was asking what card you have as 400mb/s is incredibly fast for a UHSII card


----------



## goldenhusky (Feb 29, 2020)

Viggo said:


> Just had a look at CFE prices and holy sh!t, so a 256gb costs half of a brand new R, pretty shocking....



Hope you are being sarcastic. If not, in the USA 256gb CFE is starting at $280 (Prograde) and $400 for a 256gb Sandisk extreme pro. In comparison a 256GB SD UHS--II V90 rated card is costing $330 and up. of course if you were to buy a V60 or less rated card the price is less than half of the above said prices.
Above Prices I found today at bandh.com


----------



## Richard Anthony (Feb 29, 2020)

Card speeds , doesn't the new Canon system allow immediate download on to this new Canon transfer site they are creating ?


----------



## slclick (Feb 29, 2020)

navastronia said:


> Yeah, I really want to know what those R5 file sizes are going to be like. I'm shooting a lot of JPG right now with my RP (partly because there are no camera-matching RAW profiles in Lightroom), so this is rarely an issue, but I think I may need to upgrade to 64 or 128 GB cards when I have a camera with over 40 MP.


Hasn't LR had RP RAW profiles since 12/2019?


----------



## navastronia (Mar 1, 2020)

slclick said:


> Hasn't LR had RP RAW profiles since 12/2019?



Not camera matching, no.


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Mar 1, 2020)

Who else was rooting instead for ...

Slot #1 - VHS

Slot #2 - 8 Track


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Mar 1, 2020)

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said:


> Who else was rooting instead for ...
> 
> Slot #1 - VHS
> 
> Slot #2 - 8 Track



I was hoping for vinyl recording station.


----------



## canonnews (Mar 1, 2020)

neurorx said:


> If the R5 is rumored to be 45 MP at 20fps, is anyone concerned this will lead to a buffer issue for an SD card? That’s more lifting than the 1DX3.



unlike the 1DX Mark III that can shoot at 20 fps with a mechanicall shutter - the R5 cannot.

people seem to be keying on the 20 fps when in all practicality, the 12 fps is most likely going to be used most often because of the mechanical shutter.

I don't notice any real problems on the M6 II and that's with 16 fps and 32.5MP. around the same as 12fps and 45mp.

IMO, this issue is overblown.

Granted you have two dissimilar cards and the nonsense dealing with that - but Canon is going to leave some stuff off for the R1. You can't expect everything you dream of on the R5 when Canon has to turn around and try to convince you to get an R1 in a year's time.


----------



## AaronT (Mar 1, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> yup, the max speed of the Sandisk Extreme Pro 64GB read speed is up to 300mb/s and write speed of 260mb/s which is the important one as that is what determines how fast the buffer fills up. Thats why I was asking what card you have as 400mb/s is incredibly fast for a UHSII card


I was replying to someone else who said "A UHS II card can easily record 450mb/sec on my R." I never said that I had a UHS II card that could record that fast.


----------



## mcs130 (Mar 1, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> why is a UHS-II SD slot suddenly useless?



It's not... I am a 5DMk IV shooter who also has the new 90D which has the single UHS-II slot which is fully backward compatible. I use both UHS-I and UHS-II cards in it ... no issues at all. The UHS-II is clearly faster especially at the speed the 90D can shoot 10 FPS. Given the high pixel density 32 MP of the 90D, a 64GB UHS-II does fill fast at that 10 FPS speed.


----------



## Bahrd (Mar 1, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Because it requires lots of energy, drains your battery fast.


?? 
What's the difference between a memory on a board vs an on-card memory?


----------



## i_SH (Mar 1, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



Canon Rumors Guy, I wonder if there were any rumors that Canon could return to two units, R1 and R1S?


----------



## Otara (Mar 1, 2020)

Are people even sure that the 20fps isnt a cropped burst mode like the M6 II? A lot of these calculations may be irrelevant as they're based on assumptions of full sensor and 14 bit.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Mar 1, 2020)

AaronT said:


> I was replying to someone else who said "A UHS II card can easily record 450mb/sec on my R." I never said that I had a UHS II card that could record that fast.


lol, it gets a little confusing with these threads.


----------



## Joules (Mar 1, 2020)

Otara said:


> Are people even sure that the 20fps isnt a cropped burst mode like the M6 II? A lot of these calculations may be irrelevant as they're based on assumptions of full sensor and 14 bit.


We are not sure of that. But Canon's wording will cause them a lot of complaints if it is a crop mode. As the throughput of 40/45 MP 20 FPS is so high (nothing else comes close) I'm sure it won't have AF though.


----------



## phunguyen (Mar 1, 2020)

I don’t know why people are crazy about CFExpress cards price, they’re actually good deals, much faster cards with almost same price with ush-ii sd cards. Sandisk uhs ii 128gb is ~$200, CFExpress 128gb $200-$250.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Mar 1, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> Card speeds , doesn't the new Canon system allow immediate download on to this new Canon transfer site they are creating ?


The blurb coming out says the R5 will be the 1st camera to be able to use the new cloud based storage, so great idea in principle but I would think it will still relay on the images being stored on the SD or CFE cards 1st before transfer and also rely on the speeds of internet connection either by wifi being available or via your own phone hotspot. Canon don't have a great track record with this kind of thing as the Canon Connect app demonstrates but you never know, they seem to be bringing out some excellent new tech with great software so this could be the 1st one to work. If so great news.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Mar 1, 2020)

Joules said:


> We are not sure of that. But Canon's wording will cause them a lot of complaints if it is a crop mode. As the throughput of 40/45 MP 20 FPS is so high (nothing else comes close) I'm sure it won't have AF though.


Although the R is a fantastic stills camera, thats one thing I miss from my old 7D MKii as the R has a lot slower frame rate and even slower if AF is activated. Im sure Canon could do it with AF at 20FPS if they wanted to but not sure they will as it could detract from the 1DX MKiii and a future mirrorless version. The price would probably increase massively as well lol


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Mar 1, 2020)

Tom W said:


> So you'll probably give up a bit of speed when using the SD UHS-II compared to the CFExpress, but that's still a pretty doggone fast card.
> 
> I would suspect that it would be backwards compatible with UHS-I SD cards as well, albeit at a more reduced buffer clearing speed.


I wonder if they will apply a similar option that the 1DX MKIII has of being able to assign each card to a different medium, i.e. one does stills and the other does video? That could be interesting and mean the UHS II SD could be used for stills and probably be able to cope with the frame rate and clear the buffer unless using 20fps for sustained periods. The CFE could easily cope with the video side even at 8k I would imagine with write speeds of up to 1200mb/s


----------



## brad-man (Mar 1, 2020)

phunguyen said:


> I don’t know why people are crazy about CFExpress cards price, they’re actually good deals, much faster cards with almost same price with ush-ii sd cards. Sandisk uhs ii 128gb is ~$200, CFExpress 128gb $200-$250.


While it is true that the price difference between UHS-ll and CFExpress is not that extreme, a camera that utilizes UHS-ll is backwards compatible and can use UHS-l when speed is not an issue. With CFExpress that is not the case. Since most folks (myself included) feel that multiple cards are required for piece of mind, it adds up to mucho dinero. In the future when more devices use both formats more frequently, economy of scale will kick in and prices will lower. But for now, ouch!


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Mar 1, 2020)

Bahrd said:


> Why not to use an internal super-fast solid drive (with a few capacity variants) instead of an SD card slot?
> A CFE card would nicely work like a backup then...


I wondered about this myself with Flash storage getting cheaper and smaller. However I think Canon and the other manufacturers are worried about being as flexible as possible with removable storage being so much easier to keep safe and connect to other gadgets etc. However Mobile phones are now showing how large storage can be built into small items whilst retaining amazing ability to back up to cloud based storage and also be available on all you other connected devices. The Apple model is brilliant at this. The only downside is how it would cope with the massive file sizes of RAW images and the 20/25FPS burst rates. At present, Im not sure the technology is able to do this.


----------



## Joules (Mar 1, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Im sure Canon could do it with AF at 20FPS if they wanted to but not sure they will as it could detract from the 1DX MKiii and a future mirrorless version.


In its fastest video mode the 1DX III does 5.5K 60 Hz but is unable to do AF. That amount of data coming from the sensor pretty much matches what the R5 will do at 20 FPS 45 MP. I think even if they wanted to offer AF in that mode, they can't. No crippling here, 45 MP at 20 FPS is simply a ridiculous throughput.

It's 150 % of what the A7 R IV does, 225 % of what the 1DX III does, 430 % of what the R does! There has to be a compromise.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Mar 1, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> I wondered about this myself with Flash storage getting cheaper and smaller. However I think Canon and the other manufacturers are worried about being as flexible as possible with removable storage being so much easier to keep safe and connect to other gadgets etc. However Mobile phones are now showing how large storage can be built into small items whilst retaining amazing ability to back up to cloud based storage and also be available on all you other connected devices. The Apple model is brilliant at this. The only downside is how it would cope with the massive file sizes of RAW images and the 20/25FPS burst rates. At present, Im not sure the technology is able to do this.


Bear in mind too that SSD memory is "great", but it can (and does occasionally) fail (albeit it is much more reliable than spinning discs).

So, what do you do with the camera if the built in memory fails? It will be repairable of course, but not great for a working pro. You could make it easily replaceable.... if it is easily replaceable, why not just have a removable disk....and hey presto you're back to a card


----------



## uri.raz (Mar 1, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> However Mobile phones are now showing how large storage can be built into small items whilst retaining amazing ability to back up to cloud based storage and also be available on all you other connected devices. The Apple model is brilliant at this.



There's a list of female celebrities who, I suspect, disagree with your description of the service.


----------



## Otara (Mar 1, 2020)

Joules said:


> We are not sure of that. But Canon's wording will cause them a lot of complaints if it is a crop mode. As the throughput of 40/45 MP 20 FPS is so high (nothing else comes close) I'm sure it won't have AF though.



Thats another possibility. Without the whole picture, many of the assessments being made in this thread seem premature.


----------



## jam05 (Mar 1, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> why is a UHS-II SD slot suddenly useless?


It's useless if you've purchased a CFexpress card for write speeds at 1gbs. The SD slot is 640mbs tops. Tortoise speed. The camera will always write at the lowest card slot speed when two different cards are used. In essence making the second slower SD slot useless, when using the CFexpress slot.


----------



## jam05 (Mar 1, 2020)

Yes the second SD UHSII slot is in essence "useless" when using a CFexpress card for it's 1GBS write speed. The UHS II cards at tortoise write speeds would not be the cards of choice for those with desire to optimize the cameras image processing performance. It's simple.


----------



## jam05 (Mar 1, 2020)

navastronia said:


> Wait for the R1, then.
> 
> No offense to Mr. Toes, or any other poster, but this thread is bananas. I can't imagine a _less_ controversial Canon decision than this; every 5D since the mark II has had mismatched slots. It's a feature of the line by now. Deal with it, or buy something else.


And forever has been the complaint of throttled down write speed from those knowledgeable. Of course there were many that never knew and assumed that the 5D would be writing at two speeds.


----------



## jam05 (Mar 1, 2020)

sulla said:


> I looked up the specs, UHS-II can theoretically go up to 312 MB/s (half duplex, i.e. read or write).


Yes in 2020 it's " tortoise" speed in comparison to a CFexpress card at 1GBS per channel. The CFexpress slot would be throttled down to the slower SD slot.


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 1, 2020)

jam05 said:


> And forever has been the complaint of throttled down write speed from those knowledgeable. Of course there were many that never knew and assumed that the 5D would be writing at two speeds.





jam05 said:


> Yes in 2020 it's " tortoise" speed in comparison to a CFexpress card at 1GBS per channel. The CFexpress slot would be throttled down to the slower SD slot.





jam05 said:


> Yes the second SD UHSII slot is in essence "useless" when using a CFexpress card for it's 1GBS write speed. The UHS II cards at tortoise write speeds would not be the cards of choice for those with desire to optimize the cameras image processing performance. It's simple.


yeah, SONY got it right in a7R IV !!! A stunning write to card performance. with a second memory card being SD UHS II.. oh, wait.... 

"... A couple of big things have changed with the Sony A7r IV compared to the previous model. The biggest is the addition of a* UHS-II memory card in Slot 2* for incredibly fast memory card speeds when shooting with a dual memory card setup.

It also looks like *Sony has upgraded the UHS-II hardware as it’s now one of the fastest mirrorless UHS-II cameras* (A.M.: but only until R5 did hit the market later in 2020)... *with performance very similar to the XQD cards found in the* Nikon Z6/Z7...."









Best Memory Cards Sony A7rIV - Real Benchmarks | Alik Griffin


A complete list of memory card speeds and their in-camera performance (coming soon) as well as some great recommendations and a video record time chart. Use this guide to find the best memory cards…




alikgriffin.com


----------



## BillB (Mar 1, 2020)

jam05 said:


> And forever has been the complaint of throttled down write speed from those knowledgeable. Of course there were many that never knew and assumed that the 5D would be writing at two speeds.


And there were those who could work with the slower write speed.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 1, 2020)

canonnews said:


> unlike the 1DX Mark III that can shoot at 20 fps with a mechanicall shutter - the R5 cannot.
> 
> people seem to be keying on the 20 fps when in all practicality, the 12 fps is most likely going to be used most often because of the mechanical shutter.
> 
> ...


A minor detail, but I believe you mean 14 fps on the M6 II.

But, during this discussion I have thought the same thing, that, while lower, the M6 II is ballpark to the same throughput we are talking here. So, I tested this yesterday and just to confirm, a second time just now. At least my M6 II, the buffer fills up at EDIT (just checked spreadsheet before closing it) 1.85 seconds. The frame rate during that time was 12.5 fps yesterday and 13 fps today (rated at 14, but I was above ISO 100, so that may explain it). After that 1.85 second burst, the M6 II then dropped to an average of 2.1 fps for another 18 seconds that I tested. I've actually just ordered a UHS-II card for my M6 II (a benefit of this thread, I hadn't even thought about it and have been using a 95 MB/sec Sandisk Extreme Pro UHS 1 card I have). But, file size was 32.9 MB, so the throughput after the buffer was filled was 69.1 MB/sec, which is about the read speed of the Sandisk.

Applying that to a UHS-II card, it has been observed that the real write speed of the very best cards is 180 MB/sec in the EOS-R.





Canon EOS R Fastest SD Cards UHS-II vs UHS-I comparison of Write Speed in the EOS R Mirrorless Digital Camera - Camera Memory Speed Comparison & Performance tests for SD and CF cards


Canon EOS R SD card speed comparison. Recommended memory cards for the fullframe mirrorless digital camera for fast continuous shooting. Which Secure Digital memory cards to buy for the EOS-R.




www.cameramemoryspeed.com





So, based on science, you know, working, I would assume that with my M6 II could do ~5.5 fps after the buffer fills if I have a UHS II card. Apply this to a Canon camera where file sizes vary with ISO but tend to range from the 1 to 1.5x the resolution, a 45 MP camera would likely have ~45 MB files at low ISO and ~60 MB files at high ISO. So, with UHS II you are looking at 3 - 4 fps with UHS II after the buffer is filled.

So, next, I am waiting to hear how large the buffer is on the R5. If say 10 seconds, I am probably good and do not consider it an issue. If like the M6 II and 1.85 secs...I consider this to be an issue. (EDIT-just checked my 5D4, 2.4 seconds to fill buffer). Point is, if the buffer is as small as other cameras, I will be turning off the SD card any time I want high fps, negating the benefit of a second card slot. 

Oh, and for those of you citing Sony....this is one of the top gripes I hear from Sony users, after the buffer fills it takes FOREVER to write all the data to the card.

So, "overblown"...sure, for landscape/portrait photographers. Wildlife/sport photographers who want more than 20MP resolution, I think that is who is evaluating this a bit more critically.


----------



## caffetin (Mar 1, 2020)

ok,now we know it is coming.anybody knows the price,aprox?


----------



## slclick (Mar 1, 2020)

caffetin said:


> ok,now we know it is coming.anybody knows the price?


No


----------



## brad-man (Mar 1, 2020)

caffetin said:


> ok,now we know it is coming.anybody knows the price?


Yes. But they're not telling...


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Mar 1, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> There's a list of female celebrities who, I suspect, disagree with your description of the service.





StoicalEtcher said:


> Bear in mind too that SSD memory is "great", but it can (and does occasionally) fail (albeit it is much more reliable than spinning discs).
> 
> So, what do you do with the camera if the built in memory fails? It will be repairable of course, but not great for a working pro. You could make it easily replaceable.... if it is easily replaceable, why not just have a removable disk....and hey presto you're back to a card


Exactly. I think Canon will retain the removable medium for a while as it certainly has the benefits you describe. However longer term, I can see the internal SSD memory option being very attractive if the transferring of images to cloud storage is seamless and the robustness of the memory improves. Again, similar to smart phones, tablets etc, Ive never had a memory failure and the back up functions are seamless so even if it did fail, things are safe. I think this will be a way off though and it's likely that a starting point would be a combination of both internal and removable. Who knows??


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Mar 1, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> There's a list of female celebrities who, I suspect, disagree with your description of the service.


What on earth do you mean? I think your on the wrong thread, this is about Canon EOS R5 and what memory Canon will use plus the new cloud based storage medium they are launching.


----------



## uri.raz (Mar 1, 2020)

jam05 said:


> It's useless if you've purchased a CFexpress card for write speeds at 1gbs. The SD slot is 640mbs tops. Tortoise speed. The camera will always write at the lowest card slot speed when two different cards are used. In essence making the second slower SD slot useless, when using the CFexpress slot.



A) If its that important to you, either use one slot, or buy the EOS 1D X for its dual CFExpress slots,.

B) Until literally last month, the best you could get was dual UHS-II (312 MB/s) in Sony land, announced under 9 months ago. Yet, people are already bi***ing about it not becoming a standard.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Mar 1, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> Exactly. I think Canon will retain the removable medium for a while as it certainly has the benefits you describe. However longer term, I can see the internal SSD memory option being very attractive if the transferring of images to cloud storage is seamless and the robustness of the memory improves. Again, similar to smart phones, tablets etc, Ive never had a memory failure and the back up functions are seamless so even if it did fail, things are safe. I think this will be a way off though and it's likely that a starting point would be a combination of both internal and removable. Who knows??



In the cameras of this grade, the cloud storage will never be a primary storage. Maybe in the remote future where there's stable internet connection everywhere? But now... you can easily have 128G of data after a photoshoot. Imagine uploading it to the cloud from a remote area with poor reception and waiting until upload has finished until you can resume shooting. Several hours of uploading and you have no battery power because your camera must be on during the process. Also the cost of WiFi/4G/5G may be drastically different between your CBD and remote towns or countries. The cloud is great as a backup storage but not as a primary working storage.

Internal in-camera storage has already been used in some Canon camcorders (HF10 for example - but it had a card slot too). The disadvantage is that it's a weak link, if it fails the whole camera fails, you can't expand and upgrade it and it also increases the cost of the camera.


----------



## jam05 (Mar 1, 2020)

Would gladly trade in ditch all the old slow SD cards for
SanDisk 128 Extreme Pro CFexpress Card Ty[e B


----------



## peters (Mar 1, 2020)

joestopper said:


> But people who claim stills are 20FPS *continuously* are not doing stills. Thats a video ...


Sports and some animal photographers may disagree. 
But basically you are correct, its not much of an issue for photographers. 

I think I wokuld have preferred 2 cfe slots, so I dont need so many different cards... but being able to use cheap SD cards is also a nice feature.


----------



## Rule556 (Mar 1, 2020)

slclick said:


> Most folks will whine over anything and everything, I can imagine a 28 page complaint over strap lug placement.



If there’s no strap lug on the bottom of the camera, I’m not buying it.


----------



## neurorx (Mar 1, 2020)

canonnews said:


> unlike the 1DX Mark III that can shoot at 20 fps with a mechanicall shutter - the R5 cannot.
> 
> people seem to be keying on the 20 fps when in all practicality, the 12 fps is most likely going to be used most often because of the mechanical shutter.
> 
> ...


Why would mechanical shutter be used more than an electronic one? Isn’t mechanical largely for flash photography or in old school lighting?


----------



## VICYASA (Mar 1, 2020)

caffetin said:


> ok,now we know it is coming.anybody knows the price,aprox?


Hopefully $3499!


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 1, 2020)

Rule556 said:


> If there’s no strap lug on the bottom of the camera, I’m not buying it.


And a decent strap. For nearly $4k I expect a nice, wide, soft Italian leather strap from a boutique on Rodeo Drive. C'mon Canon!  No more of those "garrote" straps!


----------



## davidhfe (Mar 1, 2020)

neurorx said:


> Why would mechanical shutter be used more than an electronic one? Isn’t mechanical largely for flash photography or in old school lighting?



Most electronic shutters (almost certainly including the one in the R5) have rolling shutter artifacts. Generally mechanical shooting is preferred for any sort of quick action.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Mar 1, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> And a decent strap. For nearly $4k I expect a nice, wide, soft Italian leather strap from a boutique on Rodeo Drive. C'mon Canon!  No more of those "garrote" straps!


No chance - you know Canon - it will be intentionally crippled with a nylon strap!


----------



## phunguyen (Mar 1, 2020)

brad-man said:


> While it is true that the price difference between UHS-ll and CFExpress is not that extreme, a camera that utilizes UHS-ll is backwards compatible and can use UHS-l when speed is not an issue. With CFExpress that is not the case. Since most folks (myself included) feel that multiple cards are required for piece of mind, it adds up to mucho dinero. In the future when more devices use both formats more frequently, economy of scale will kick in and prices will lower. But for now, ouch!


Why buying a high speed supported camera if you want to use slow card on it ? Assuming R5 will do 20fps no crop, a 45mp file is ~40MB, 40x20 = 800MB/s, it’s a huge data rate, and from experiences from using A7RIII, I know the annoying feeling when have to wait for clearing buffer, as A7RIII have only 1 uhs-ii slot, dual recording on A7RIII is so slow.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 1, 2020)

phunguyen said:


> Why buying a high speed supported camera if you want to use slow card on it ? Assuming R5 will do 20fps no crop, a 45mp file is ~40MB, 40x20 = 800MB/s, it’s a huge data rate, and from experiences from using A7RIII, I know the annoying feeling when have to wait for clearing buffer, as A7RIII have only 1 uhs-ii slot, dual recording on A7RIII is so slow.


Some people may not ever use the high fps. Some may buy the camera for other reasons (megapixels, etc.). Only people who need the high fps and video need the fast cards. For 12 fps mechanical shutter, a slower and less expensive card is perfectly adequate. Even with my R, I never use the continuous mode. If I were to buy the R5 it would be for the megapixels only. Would I buy a CFexpress card and UHS II card? Yes, but they would not have to be the top line cards, just something to fill the slots.


----------



## This_That (Mar 1, 2020)

Personally I do no video at all. Wasted tech on me. So all the discussion about the two card slots is pretty much academic despite exact one situation. 

You are on travel, no camera shop near, no chance to mailorder something. Your CFExpress cards are full, no backup possible. That SD slot right there is your lifesaver. I shot with a crappy microSD card in an SD Adapter because that was the thing I can get in every mobile phone shop around the corner. Yes, slow but I was still able to shot.


----------



## slclick (Mar 1, 2020)

Rule556 said:


> If there’s no strap lug on the bottom of the camera, I’m not buying it.


No worries, RRS has got your back for $140


----------



## sulla (Mar 1, 2020)

canonnews said:


> IMO, this issue is overblown.


Yes, I agree, the issue is overblown for most practical purposes. If the buffer is large enough and you are willing to invest heavily in the very fastes SDcards, noone will almost ever notice.

But, Canon could *easily *have done better (assuming this rumour is right).


----------



## Viggo (Mar 1, 2020)

A $1000 for a 256gb is why I’m glad they include an SD port also.


----------



## sulla (Mar 1, 2020)

Rule556 said:


> If there’s no strap lug on the bottom of the camera, I’m not buying it.


I always use my 5D without a strap. I've never found a strap convenient to use.


----------



## sulla (Mar 1, 2020)

Viggo said:


> A $1000 for a 256gb is why I’m glad they include an SD port also.


they are down to 150 nowadays.
whereas the very fastest SD-cards are much more expensive. So, I'm glad there is a CFexpress slot.


----------



## slclick (Mar 1, 2020)

sulla said:


> Yes, I agree, the issue is overblown for most practical purposes. If the buffer is large enough and you are willing to invest heavily in the very fastes SDcards, noone will almost ever notice.
> 
> But, Canon could *easily *have done better (assuming this rumour is right).


Panties in a bunch all over the forum over a camera body shell in an acrylic case at WPPI. We don't know enough for all this boiling blood.


----------



## peters (Mar 1, 2020)

sulla said:


> Yes, I agree, the issue is overblown for most practical purposes. If the buffer is large enough and you are willing to invest heavily in the very fastes SDcards, noone will almost ever notice.
> 
> But, Canon could *easily *have done better (assuming this rumour is right).


I think its open for discussion if many users would think 2 CFE slots would have been better. Its obvious the technologicaly mroe advantaged option (and I would have prefered it by a bit) - but in a practical world its quite nice to be able to use cheap SD cards and not being forced to invest 1000$ in new CFE cards right away. This could be seen as an advantage by many.
Anyway, I dont think its much of a topic, its gonna perform great in 99% of the use cases, no matter what card =)


----------



## brad-man (Mar 1, 2020)

Viggo said:


> A $1000 for a 256gb is why I’m glad they include an SD port also.


Do you buy your cards on Rodeo Drive?




sulla said:


> they are down to 150 nowadays.
> whereas the very fastest SD-cards are much more expensive. So, I'm glad there is a CFexpress slot.


Do you buy your cards from a guy in a van at Walmart?

Extreme Pro 256GB are $400 @ B&H


----------



## brad-man (Mar 1, 2020)

phunguyen said:


> Why buying a high speed supported camera if you want to use slow card on it ? Assuming R5 will do 20fps no crop, a 45mp file is ~40MB, 40x20 = 800MB/s, it’s a huge data rate, and from experiences from using A7RIII, I know the annoying feeling when have to wait for clearing buffer, as A7RIII have only 1 uhs-ii slot, dual recording on A7RIII is so slow.


I rarely shoot in HS Continuous, and if I need to, I'll just turn off the write to SD in the menu. For the other 98% of my shooting, UHS-l would do. UHS-ll is overkill. YMMV


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 1, 2020)

brad-man said:


> Do you buy your cards on Rodeo Drive?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Maybe shipping and vat to Europe or the UK (I have an English friend that is adamant that the UK is not Europe) makes B&H not an option for him. Pricing in Europe is probably different than the USA.


----------



## slclick (Mar 1, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Maybe shipping and vat to Europe makes B&H not an option for him. Pricing in Europe is probably different than the USA.


Well, at least there's a guy in a Sprinter at an Aldi.


----------



## gmon750 (Mar 1, 2020)

I’d be okay with it if I could primarily write to the CFExpress card while the camera writes to the SD card in the background.

If not, no thank you. I’ll see what the R1 does.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 1, 2020)

brad-man said:


> Do you buy your cards on Rodeo Drive?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My quote was for a Sandisk 1700/1200. For comparison a brand new R is $2500 as of now. FWIW my lowest ever paid job was $16 pr hour working retail. Average pay for a year is $60.000 here and $49000 in the US, so not crazy difference.
We pay 25% VAT on everything also. And average 25-30% tax on our salary. So it’s not that it’s just crazy expensive here, although it feels like it 

my son needs a hearing aid, I just checked the price without insurance in the US, $50.000, he gets it for free, zip, zero, nothing.


----------



## Quackator (Mar 1, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> And a decent strap. For nearly $4k I expect a nice, wide, soft Italian leather strap from a boutique on Rodeo Drive.



You mean one of those poser guitar belts that scream "steal me" from miles away already?

I have been seen buying cameras from the 80ies to harvest some
of those stealthy narrow nylon straps with rubber shoulder pieces
that shipped with AE-1 and A-1.


----------



## Cbenedict (Mar 1, 2020)

yoms said:


> Do you think there's a chance we'll see an extension grip for the R5 as the RP has the EG-E1? Thanks.


I think you'll see a battery grip. They never made a first party extension grip for the R. But of course I have giant meat mits and the R doesn't need an extension grip like the RP.


----------



## sulla (Mar 1, 2020)

brad-man said:


> Do you buy your cards from a guy in a van at Walmart?


not really:
the fastest SD-cards are more expensive than slow CFexpress cards (which are much faster still): I found
CFExpress: DeLOCK Flash R1550/W900: 256GB, write speed 900 MB/sec for 150 €
SD: UHS-II: Toshiba Exceria Pro N502 R270/W260: 256GB, write speed 260 MB/sec for 300 €


----------



## Otara (Mar 1, 2020)

docsmith said:


> So, "overblown"...sure, for landscape/portrait photographers. Wildlife/sport photographers who want more than 20MP resolution, I think that is who is evaluating this a bit more critically.



As one of those wildlife types myself, I think they're setting themselves up for disappointment no matter what if they think they're getting a continuous AF 20FPS no artifact option, let alone in two slots. 12FPS/45MP in a '5D5' mirrorless is a very healthy improvement over the 5DIV, and is almost certainly going to be the real usable mode from a sports/wildlife perspective.

Not to mention this is all CR2 anyway.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 1, 2020)

Quackator said:


> You mean one of those poser guitar belts that scream "steal me" from miles away already?
> 
> I have been seen buying cameras from the 80ies to harvest some
> of those stealthy narrow nylon straps with rubber shoulder pieces
> that shipped with AE-1 and A-1.


Yes! I still use the leather Martin strap I had for my Martin on my Yamaha guitar. I am the ultimate poser since I can't play a single chord right now.  It is all for appearances.  Almost the same for my Ukulele. There is something mystical about a hugely fat guy posing with a tiny Ukulele and huge 1960's vintage aloha shirt.


----------



## Kit. (Mar 1, 2020)

sulla said:


> not really:
> the fastest SD-cards are more expensive than slow CFexpress cards (which are much faster still): I found
> CFExpress: DeLOCK


First time to hear of such a brand.

It might be cheap, but I'm not sure I will trust my images to such a brand.


----------



## neurorx (Mar 1, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> Most electronic shutters (almost certainly including the one in the R5) have rolling shutter artifacts. Generally mechanical shooting is preferred for any sort of quick action.


. Wouldn’t this be a significant problem then for the 1DX3 live view shooting, the Sony a9 and A9ii and any future R1? All these cameras are 20 FPS or will be.. Maybe I’m not understanding something?


----------



## Otara (Mar 1, 2020)

neurorx said:


> . Wouldn’t this be a significant problem then for the 1DX3 live view shooting, the Sony a9 and A9ii and any future R1? All these cameras are 20 FPS or will be.. Maybe I’m not understanding something?



It depends a lot on the situation if its usable.




__





A new test debuts at IR: The Sony A9’s rolling shutter really *is* pretty dang fast!


If you've ever shot a video that included a fast-moving subject like an aircraft's propellers, you'll have noticed that they seem to be being whipped through the air and then bizarrely discarded. If so, you've been…



www.imaging-resource.com





Article here, so for instance propellers can look odd, but a moving person/animal could be fine depending on the actual level of rolling shutter and personal standards.


----------



## mpeeps (Mar 1, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Yes, many of my JPEGs are 25MB while CR3s are in the low 30s ...


I'm sure everyone can adjust the size of both their JPG and Raw files. I don't understand this whole conversation!! I record JPG's to one card and Raw's to the other if I have two slots. I record both files to my SD card in EOS R and once again, adjust size of files in the menu to meet my needs. What am I missing?


----------



## brad-man (Mar 1, 2020)

Viggo said:


> My quote was for a Sandisk 1700/1200. For comparison a brand new R is $2500 as of now. FWIW my lowest ever paid job was $16 pr hour working retail. Average pay for a year is $60.000 here and $49000 in the US, so not crazy difference.
> We pay 25% VAT on everything also. And average 25-30% tax on our salary. So it’s not that it’s just crazy expensive here, although it feels like it
> 
> my son needs a hearing aid, I just checked the price without insurance in the US, $50.000, he gets it for free, zip, zero, nothing.


I get that European prices are high and VAT & all, but the difference between $400 and $1000 is 250%. By that measure, an R would cost $4500 there ($1800 x 2.5). There seems to be a disconnect somewhere, but you certainly have my financial sympathy! 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...in_extremepro_compactflash_express_256gb.html


----------



## brad-man (Mar 1, 2020)

sulla said:


> not really:
> the fastest SD-cards are more expensive than slow CFexpress cards (which are much faster still): I found
> CFExpress: DeLOCK Flash R1550/W900: 256GB, write speed 900 MB/sec for 150 €
> SD: UHS-II: Toshiba Exceria Pro N502 R270/W260: 256GB, write speed 260 MB/sec for 300 €


I've never heard of that brand of card. I guess I'm a bit of a memory snob. All I ever buy is Sandisk Extreme Pro for any type of camera memory. I've never had one fail and is probably why I've never jumped on the camera two card minimum bandwagon.


----------



## chasingrealness (Mar 1, 2020)

I would love it if the camera could be updated to include internal connectivity with third-party lighting gear from Godox, Profoto, etc. Of course that is probably never going to happen. Alternatively it could be sweet if canon started making portable strobes like the evolv200. 

Also, I wonder if the old LP-6 batteries would work in this since it’s going to have a new high capacity battery sold with it...I have a couple of these sitting arounD and wouldn’t mind putting them to use.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 1, 2020)

mpeeps said:


> I'm sure everyone can adjust the size of both their JPG and Raw files. I don't understand this whole conversation!! I record JPG's to one card and Raw's to the other if I have two slots. I record both files to my SD card in EOS R and once again, adjust size of files in the menu to meet my needs. What am I missing?


If I were to sum up this whole conversation, well, the reality is that most cameras write to both cards at the limiting cards write rate. So, by using the UHS II card, you are likely limiting the entire camera to ~180 MB/sec write rate (based on observed write rates to EOS-R with UHS II cards, not theoretical "up to" write rates). That is still really good, but after the buffer in the R5 is filled (and we do not know the size of the buffer), the R5's 12 fps will drop to 3-4 fps. If the buffer is small (I measured my M6 II at 1.85 secs and my 5DIV at 2.3 secs with SD card active), if you want to seemlessly use your cards in sequence, etc, this matters. Or, you turn off the SD card, and then you shoot with one card slot and have write rates that are something north of 800 MB/sec, or if you buy Type B, 2 TB/sec, and you render the SD card "useless" (I think that phrase set some people off, but technically, if you ain't using it .....but this does not affect most users).

Also, and I do not believe this has been mentioned yet, but I think part of the sticker shock here for those of us that care is that in most previous iterations like the 5DIV, sure, there were two card slots, but the write rate from CF UDMA7 to SD UHS I was fairly close (~110 MB/sec to ~78 MB/sec). Here, we are talking about up to 2 TB/sec to 180 MB/sec, so an order of magnitude lower. Will this still be a great camera even if "limited" to UHS II, but this is a limitation compared to CFE write rates. 

Also, sounds like you shoot jpg and RAW in different scenarios. Sounds like you do this for file size. If so, keep doing it (I often shoot this way too). But, if you care about fps, you might want to play with your camera. I've read and observed with my own cameras, RAW +JPG after buffer is full is actually slower than RAW + RAW. For example, on my 5DIV in todays test, RAW + RAW was 2 fps after buffer was filled. RAW + JPG was 1.5 fps.


----------



## Bert63 (Mar 1, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> There is something mystical about a hugely fat guy posing with a tiny Ukulele and huge 1960's vintage aloha shirt.




If I were Berta instead of Bert methinks we'd be dating.


----------



## brad-man (Mar 1, 2020)

chasingrealness said:


> I would love it if the camera could be updated to include internal connectivity with third-party lighting gear from Godox, Profoto, etc. Of course that is probably never going to happen. Alternatively it could be sweet if canon started making portable strobes like the evolv200.
> 
> *I would like Canon to have their higher end cameras to have an RT controller built in so a flash wouldn't need to be on the camera for off-camera flash.*
> 
> Also, I wonder if the old LP-6 batteries would work in this since it’s going to have a new high capacity battery sold with it...I have a couple of these sitting arounD and wouldn’t mind putting them to use.


Any battery that Canon labels LP-E6 will be compatible with any camera that takes an LP-E6. If a new battery was not compatible, Canon would change the name entirely...


----------



## djkraq (Mar 1, 2020)

Canon giving people options and here we are still complaining sheesh. 1st world problems


----------



## djkraq (Mar 2, 2020)

Bahrd said:


> Why not to use an internal super-fast solid drive (with a few capacity variants) instead of an SD card slot?
> A CFE card would nicely work like a backup then...



That would increase camera cost and SSD tech has a finite amount of read and write capabilities.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Mar 2, 2020)

VICYASA said:


> Hopefully $3499!



Hopefully it's $99. Realistically, up to $4000...


----------



## brad-man (Mar 2, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Maybe shipping and vat to Europe or the UK (I have an English friend that is adamant that the UK is not Europe) makes B&H not an option for him. Pricing in Europe is probably different than the USA.


I get that. But 250% increase?


----------



## beckstoy (Mar 2, 2020)

While I'd prefer having something other than SD for the second slot, it's plenty fast for photography work. I can see why those who are excited about video might be let down.

However...I'm still not sure I'll be jumping from my 5DM4's to Mirrorless with this camera. Is anyone considering this to possibly be a 5DM4 replacement? I'm sure I'll end up in the Mirrorless world, just not sure this is the body yet.

I'm thinking I'll wait to see the autofocus and what the next one will offer...


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Mar 2, 2020)

beckstoy said:


> Is anyone considering this to possibly be a 5DM4 replacement?


Yes. But only if it's 45Mp (which hopefully it is). If it's 40Mp, I'm not so sure. I'll be waiting for a higher-res version from Canon.

I'm hoping for 45Mp+ with dynamic range not worse than 5DIV. RF lenses, flip screen and IBIS are a bonus.


----------



## canonnews (Mar 2, 2020)

neurorx said:


> Why would mechanical shutter be used more than an electronic one? Isn’t mechanical largely for flash photography or in old school lighting?


articifacts, DR,etc.

looking at photonsonphotos for instance, the 1DX Mark III takes a huge hit on DR when you use the electronic shutter. The R5 will probably be no different. Thus 
it gets used as a 12fps camera in most cases.


----------



## joestopper (Mar 2, 2020)

canonnews said:


> articifacts, DR,etc.
> 
> looking at photonsonphotos for instance, the 1DX Mark III takes a huge hit on DR when you use the electronic shutter. The R5 will probably be no different. Thus
> it gets used as a 12fps camera in most cases.



What is the reason for less DR with silent shutter?


----------



## Rule556 (Mar 2, 2020)

sulla said:


> I always use my 5D without a strap. I've never found a strap convenient to use.


I joke, but I always have a Peak strap connection on the base and usually just use a wrist strap connected to it. With a normal strap, the camera carries much more naturally with one end on the left side connection and one on the base. I hate having a strap in the way of my controls, and this solves that as well.


----------



## davidhfe (Mar 2, 2020)

joestopper said:


> What is the reason for less DR with silent shutter?



The sensor reads at 12 bit instead of 14 bit to reduce rolling shutter effects


----------



## sanj (Mar 2, 2020)

This_That said:


> Personally I do no video at all. Wasted tech on me. So all the discussion about the two card slots is pretty much academic despite exact one situation.
> 
> You are on travel, no camera shop near, no chance to mailorder something. Your CFExpress cards are full, no backup possible. That SD slot right there is your lifesaver. I shot with a crappy microSD card in an SD Adapter because that was the thing I can get in every mobile phone shop around the corner. Yes, slow but I was still able to shot.


This is so true and practical. Having a camera with an SD card can be a lifesaver in extreme situations.


----------



## Aaron D (Mar 2, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> My gosh, aerodynamic water bottle?


Why does anyone pay attention to guys who use aerodynamic water bottles? And who wear sleeveless jerseys?

Sorry--off topic again! 

I'm waiting for the camera that has _interchangeable/convertable_ card slots. Six of 'em. You heard it here first!


----------



## Quackator (Mar 2, 2020)

Hamster said:


> (...) and the R doesn't need an extension grip like the RP.



Still I think the R is too small. And instead of that grip for the RP,
I prefer a solid L-shape bracket with Arca compatibility any day.


----------



## navastronia (Mar 2, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> The sensor reads at 12 bit instead of 14 bit to reduce rolling shutter effects



What's curious is that the a9 doesn't take a DR hit when using the ES, but the 1DX mk. III does. Must have faster architecture? I hope the R1 (in contrast to the 1DX mk. III) has lighting-fast readout, enough to make ES viable in 95% of shooting conditions.


----------



## Bahrd (Mar 2, 2020)

djkraq said:


> That would increase camera cost and SSD tech has a finite amount of read and write capabilities.


Yes, but:

You have to pay for a card anyway.
0.5TB M.2 are offered well under $100.
The same capacity in the CFE package costs about $500 now. 
SSD controllers have wear leveling and extra capacity to replace "bad sectors" on the fly.
Anyway, I understand there are reasons they are not offered...


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 2, 2020)

joestopper said:


> While CanonRumors is really a nice site and most info provided is appreciated, I also do notice that info is provided slice by slice just in the right dosis to keep traffic alive ...


Oh, a conspiracy theorist are you?  I agree it does seem fishy.

Jack


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 2, 2020)

mpeeps said:


> I'm sure everyone can adjust the size of both their JPG and Raw files. I don't understand this whole conversation!! I record JPG's to one card and Raw's to the other if I have two slots. I record both files to my SD card in EOS R and once again, adjust size of files in the menu to meet my needs. What am I missing?


Well, you are missing a second card slot in R, for starters. Therefore recording of a second file to the same card is..how?


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 2, 2020)

Aaron D said:


> Why does anyone pay attention to guys who use aerodynamic water bottles? And who wear sleeveless jerseys?
> 
> Sorry--off topic again!
> 
> I'm waiting for the camera that has _interchangeable/convertable_ card slots. Six of 'em. You heard it here first!


Harry??


----------



## Bahrd (Mar 2, 2020)

Aaron D said:


> Why does anyone pay attention to guys who use aerodynamic water bottles? And who wear sleeveless jerseys?


Those who shave their legs, I suppose.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 2, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Well, you are missing a second card slot in R, for starters. Therefore recording of a second file to the same card is..how?



Even on my 5DII with its single CF card I can write raw + jpeg... You have never needed two cards for that, and I don't think it could ever outrun the 150 MB/s CF card in it.


----------



## yeahright (Mar 2, 2020)

With two card slots with significantly different write speeds - Why shouldn't there be a configuration mode in which the images are written to the faster card first and later automatically copied to the slower card once the burst is over? Or only write to both cards simultaneously as long as there is enough space in the buffer, and once the buffer gets full switch to copy mode. In this case shooting would continue at the faster card's data rate, direct write to two cards (and therefore immediate backup) would be ensured for the number of images stored in the buffer, and automatic backup from card to card only for the images that won't fit in the buffer anymore. Risk of data loss if the faster card fails would then only affect those images at the end of a burst while being able to continuously shoot at the rate of the fast card.


----------



## koenkooi (Mar 2, 2020)

yeahright said:


> With two card slots with significantly different write speeds - Why shouldn't there be a configuration mode in which the images are written to the faster card first and later automatically copied to the slower card once the burst is over? Or only write to both cards simultaneously as long as there is enough space in the buffer, and once the buffer gets full switch to copy mode. [..]


I would guess that the perceived complexity of such a configuration item would make it a 1 series thing. I'd like to see this as a custom function, but I don't think we'll get it.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Mar 2, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Well, you are missing a second card slot in R, for starters. Therefore recording of a second file to the same card is..how?


There are issues in running both cards concurrently, with raw going to one card and Jpg going to the other. The SD cards have a much slower read / write speed. If the camera writes to the SD card, then the buffer is generally a lot smaller. 
I first noticed this with a 5DIII, when switching between shooting weddings at weekends and wildlife during the week. I would use the 2nd card slot for jpgs. When I then went to shoot wildlife, my max buffer drops to around 4-5 shots. If I set RAW only and on the CF card, the buffer is up to 10-11 shots. I believe it's the same issue for the 5D4 / 5DSR too.


----------



## yeahright (Mar 2, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> I would guess that the perceived complexity of such a configuration item would make it a 1 series thing. I'd like to see this as a custom function, but I don't think we'll get it.


I don't see that this would be very complex to implement... but you may be right that that sort of mode could be reserved for 1 series (where, however, it is currently not necessary)


----------



## Go Wild (Mar 2, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Oh, a conspiracy theorist are you?  I agree it does seem fishy.
> 
> Jack


Jack, I believe he don´t understand that there are no free meals! Canonrumors guy gotta make a living! Of course he will not splash everything, even if he has more info he will make it "slice by slice". Seems to me obvious and boy, can we criticize that? 


About the cards....Chill out on this one! This is only a potencial problem for those who make video and will be using this camera to shoot video. For Stills purposes, there will not be a problem at all! You have great cards SD UHS-II in the market and for stills they will be more than enough.
Of course this got pros and cons!

For me pros are:
- more card/card readers availability (most Mac and Pc have SD door)
- Possibility of using existing cards making less expensive buying new media.

Cons:
- Using 2 different type of media (hate it!!)
- Although there are great sd uhd-II cards they don´t match this new cfexpress and they are slower. This will be very bad for video shooting because you practically will be stuck with one slot. For serious filmmakers this will almost compel the use of external recorders. Or you will need to splash a big money in a 256gb/512gb cards

In stills you can have a problem if you choose crappy inexpensive UHD-I cards writing 60/80mb/s. Of course in that situations, if you are using 1 good card and other not so good, it will slow your reading therefore buffer will fill faster. With this UHS-II cards you don´t have that problem 98% of the times. They are fast...Of course, this will be a powerful camera that will ask for powerful cards.Unless you use the camera for types of photo that really don´t need those 20fps or even 12 fps. For most types of photo any UHS-II card will be fine!


----------



## styoda (Mar 2, 2020)

Anyone going to the NEC Photography Show in the UK, the R5 will be there.

The Photography Show and Video Show 2020


----------



## reef58 (Mar 2, 2020)

sulla said:


> Yes, I agree, the issue is overblown for most practical purposes. If the buffer is large enough and you are willing to invest heavily in the very fastes SDcards, noone will almost ever notice.
> 
> But, Canon could *easily *have done better (assuming this rumour is right).



Easily don't know about that. The "holy grail" on the internet the A9 uses SD. That being said I think Canon will do better with the R1. Depending on your definition of better.


----------



## reef58 (Mar 2, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> I’d be okay with it if I could primarily write to the CFExpress card while the camera writes to the SD card in the background.
> 
> If not, no thank you. I’ll see what the R1 does.



It is insane we gotten to the point when someone takes a pass on a camera due to memory cards, when the rumor suggest the card slots will be class leading, but I guess by not far enough. What are you using now that is better or adequate? Have we really gotten to the point where UHSII cards are too slow for our needs?


----------



## BobG (Mar 2, 2020)

tarjei99 said:


> People are going to buy a hideously expensive Canon R5 camera and suddenly can't afford the CF express cards for it? The high speed SD UHS-II cards are not dramatically less expensive.


Sandisk 128MB UHSII SD (300MB/s)= £86
Sandisk 128MB CFExpress (1700MB/s)= £234

So there is a fairly big difference


----------



## Viggo (Mar 2, 2020)

reef58 said:


> What are you using now that is better or adequate?



^^ this


----------



## BillB (Mar 2, 2020)

reef58 said:


> It is insane we gotten to the point when someone takes a pass on a camera due to memory cards, when the rumor suggest the card slots will be class leading, but I guess by not far enough. What are you using now that is better or adequate? Have we really gotten to the point where UHSII cards are too slow for our needs?


There always seems to be persons who think they have a use case that the new camera can't deliver on, based on rumored or imagined camera specs. One or more of these persons always seem to find their way Canon Rumors to tell us about it.


----------



## arbitrage (Mar 2, 2020)

BobG said:


> Sandisk 128MB UHSII SD (300MB/s)= £86
> Sandisk 128MB CFExpress (1700MB/s)= £234
> 
> So there is a fairly big difference


Can you provide a link to that SD card? I see the Sandisk card at 199-249 in UK: https://www.jessops.com/p/sandisk/extreme-pro-sdxc-300mb-s-128gb-uhs-ii-memory-card-133889 and https://www.wexphotovideo.com/sandisk-128gb-extreme-pro-300mbs-uhs-ii-sdxc-card-1605500/

CFE and top spec UHS-II SD cards are very similarly priced. You only save money having the SD slot if you already have a bunch of UHS-II SD cards or if you don't require top buffer/write speed nor redundancy and can just use a UHS-I or lower performance UHS-II card in the SD slot.


----------



## arbitrage (Mar 2, 2020)

There are only two Canon DSLR cameras that ever had matching card slots. The 1DX and now the 1DXIII. Just look how crippled the 1DXII was with a "fast" C-Fast slot and an ancient CF slot (but don't forget that "fast" C-fast writes at 450, Sony UHS-II SD can do 300 so they aren't miles apart). Remember the fastest CF cards are only half the write speed of a UHS-II SD slot that everyone seems to have a huge problem with all of a sudden. I don't see how anyone could have expected the R5 with that small of a body to cram in two CFE card slots. This arrangement is the best it was ever going to be. Maybe, just maybe a future R1 will get a larger body and have dual CFE.

In the future if Type A CFE starts to become a thing then that will likely be a good solution as they can get up to 1000 theoretical and the card are smaller than SD....oh wait....cue the complaints about losing the things or fumbling with gloves on etc.....


----------



## mpeeps (Mar 2, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Well, you are missing a second card slot in R, for starters. Therefore recording of a second file to the same card is..how?


Did you read my post? Obviously not. Both file types to the card on the R and one of each type to two cards on DSLR. I don't know about you, but I can go into menus and adjust how large to record each type of file - jpg and raw - onto my card(s). My only point was that.


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 2, 2020)

GMCPhotographics said:


> There are issues in running both cards concurrently, with raw going to one card and Jpg going to the other. The SD cards have a much slower read / write speed. If the camera writes to the SD card, then the buffer is generally a lot smaller.
> I first noticed this with a 5DIII, when switching between shooting weddings at weekends and wildlife during the week. I would use the 2nd card slot for jpgs. When I then went to shoot wildlife, my max buffer drops to around 4-5 shots. If I set RAW only and on the CF card, the buffer is up to 10-11 shots. I believe it's the same issue for the 5D4 / 5DSR too.


5D III max write speed SD: (x133) = around 20Mb/S, The 5DIII holds 12 raw images in *buffer*. Supposedly, it's about 17 RAW if the memory card is fast enough. JPEG *buffer* is basically infinite. RAW+JPEG *buffer* is good for only 6 or 7 shots. 
5D IV write speed SD: around 78Mb/S, 19 shot _buffer_ capacity , 36 shots until camera would slow down. up to 18 shots writing to both cards.

5D III recording to both cards was quite a disappointment..5D IV - not so much


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 2, 2020)

mpeeps said:


> Did you read my post? Obviously not. Both file types to the card on the R and one of each type to two cards on DSLR. I don't know about you, but I can go into menus and adjust how large to record each type of file - jpg and raw - onto my card(s). My only point was that.


i did read your post, otherwise I would not asked the question I asked. however. I formed the question incorrectly. I typically record to both card fro redundancy. when writing to the same card with RAW +JPG, do you use OOC JPG for an instant image delivery to your client?


----------



## ordinaryfilmmaker (Mar 2, 2020)

I know everyone is excited about the R5, but other than price, I really want to know about the R6. It's been so quiet... Hopefully the winds of change will stir up this week.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Mar 2, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Aye, I can imagine the camera runs heavily crippled on a* 300 MB/s card vs t*he 1200MB/s write of the slowest CFExpress card.* It’ll likely reduce a lot of the video modes and greatly reduce the frame rate.*



The GH5's 4K 4:2:2 10 bit video is 50 MBps, their standard 4K 4:2:0 8 bit is 15 MBps. The only video people who will notice the difference between recordings on the SD card and CFExpress card will be colorists and pixel peepers.


----------



## SaP34US (Mar 2, 2020)

Could it actually have both CFExpress Type A and a type B slot? Has it actually been confirmed?


----------



## Antono Refa (Mar 2, 2020)

Quackator said:


> And instead of that grip for the RP, I prefer a solid L-shape bracket with Arca compatibility any day.



Amen to that. I wonder why is it Canon bothers to make filters, but not L brackets.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 2, 2020)

reef58 said:


> Have we really gotten to the point where UHSII cards are too slow for our needs?


Yes. Exactly.

That is what happens when you spec 12 fps at 45 MP (rumored, but these are all rumors): 12 x 45 = 540 MB/sec. With Canon, as ISO increases so does MB/MP, usually up to ~1.5x. So 12 fps x 60 MB/frame = 720 MB/sec. At least in the EOS-R, UHS-II was only writing at a maximum of 182 MB/sec. So, the math is pretty simple, yes, UHS II is too slow to support the specs of this camera. Thus, it gets down to buffer how long that 12 fps spec will hold if you are concerned about fps over a few seconds because after that buffer is filled and once you are writing directly to your UHS II card, you are looking at 3-4 fps. 

I am not saying the R5 won't be a great camera. I am not saying the R5 will not be an improvement over the 5DIV. I am not saying the R5 won't be used for many amazing purposes. Personally, I am considering buying an R5.

But, Canon has a history of small buffers in the 5D line. About 2 to 2.5 seconds. If that holds true, then, in certain circumstances, I will likely turn off the SD card and only write to the CFE card and the 12 fps spec (and 20 fps spec for that matter) should be able to be continuous. So, in a way, this is a very nice compromise in that you do have the 12 fps continues by turning off the SD card or you do have the opportunity to write to two card slots but the speed will slow after the buffer is filled. For me, I would have preferred two CFE slots, but this is not the end of the world. 

But, UHS II cards cannot keep up with the specs of the R5. CFE can. So yes, we have gotten to the point where UHS II cards are too slow. This is why you have the CFE, XQD and other formats. As for "our" needs, that really depends on the photographer. But, if you track complaints people have about Sony cameras, pretty high on the list, at least that I hear, is that if you rattle off a series of shots, it takes a fairly long time for the buffer to clear to their UHS II cards and the camera is frozen during that time. Granted, Canon let's you write and do things during that time. One of the many reasons I like Canon.

As to the importance, as I've seen a few comments go by on this, all I can say is slower fps have impacted my photography far more than DR ever has.


----------



## cayenne (Mar 2, 2020)

slclick said:


> Yes, some people are. It's called a budget. *(not to mention kids in college!)*



It's called a condom......leads to more disposable income.


----------



## cayenne (Mar 2, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> This news makes me fear that the 5DV will also omit CF support.



With all I"m reading.....I'd be putting my money down that there will NOT even be a 5DV......it will be the R5 as the replacement/successor to the 5DIV.

Just my $0.02,

cayenne


----------



## cayenne (Mar 2, 2020)

Viggo said:


> My quote was for a Sandisk 1700/1200. For comparison a brand new R is $2500 as of now. FWIW my lowest ever paid job was $16 pr hour working retail. Average pay for a year is $60.000 here and $49000 in the US, so not crazy difference.
> We pay 25% VAT on everything also. And average 25-30% tax on our salary. So it’s not that it’s just crazy expensive here, although it feels like it
> 
> my son needs a hearing aid, I just checked the price without insurance in the US, $50.000, he gets it for free, zip, zero, nothing.



Do you not also pay income taxes....to your equivalents to our local/state/federal governments?

Or is everything ONLY VAT tax over there?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 2, 2020)

crazyrunner33 said:


> The GH5's 4K 4:2:2 10 bit video is 50 MBps, their standard 4K 4:2:0 8 bit is 15 MBps. The only video people who will notice the difference between recordings on the SD card and CFExpress card will be colorists and pixel peepers.



That example is all well and good and the R5 will likely be able to match it. But will the SD slot allow 8k recording or 4k 120fps? 

I still very much feel if you put in the much slower card you'll end up with a feature limited camera, perhaps not in areas that matter to you, but they will matter to someone. I will only invest in CFE cards, SD is too up in the air until SDE or CFE type A takes over.


----------



## davidhfe (Mar 2, 2020)

navastronia said:


> What's curious is that the a9 doesn't take a DR hit when using the ES, but the 1DX mk. III does. Must have faster architecture? I hope the R1 (in contrast to the 1DX mk. III) has lighting-fast readout, enough to make ES viable in 95% of shooting conditions.



the A9 doesn’t have Sony’s typical outstanding DR to begin with. It’s a stacked sensor, which means that there’s a buffer on the chip where the image is stored very briefly before it’s read. IIRC it’s not a true global sensor but it’s quite close. All that extra circuitry likely adds a bit of noise.


----------



## Mark3794 (Mar 2, 2020)

Lots of detailed R5 images 









写真で見るCanon EOS R5（CP+2020展示予定機）　各部外観をレポート　RF100-500mmやテレコンも


2月27日より開催が予定されていたCP+2020は、新型コロナウィルスの感染拡大状況を鑑みて中止となった。会期中にお披露目が予定されていたであろう新機種を見る機会が失われてしまったわけだが、キヤノンEOS R5の展示予定機を見る機会を得た。




dc.watch.impress.co.jp


----------



## sanj (Mar 2, 2020)

If it turns out that the SD card does not slow down the camera - camera writes to the CE card full speed and then finishing writing to the SD card it would be fine for me. As long as the CE card does not freeze while data is being written on SD. It writes to SD in the 'background'. Wonder if that can happen.


----------



## Architect1776 (Mar 2, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



Why not 2 CFE cards? For the few bucks in the scheme of things it would be best. Buy 2 CFE cards and be done with it. It is not like you go out and buy a new card every week or even month.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 2, 2020)

20 pages about the media cards.  We need more rumor material.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 2, 2020)

The war can end easily. Canon just have to release two versions.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 2, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> The war can end easily. Canon just have to release two versions.


There's no war, just unrealistic expectations. This is especially true since there never has been a matched card 5 series, ever. The 1DX Mark III is the first with matched cards from Canon. If there was a war, you've already lost. Ain't happening.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 2, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> There's no war, just unrealistic expectations. This is especially true since there never has been a matched card 5 series, ever. The 1DX Mark III is the first with matched cards from Canon. If there was a war, you've already lost. Ain't happening.


It is not unrealistic to expect a dual slot camera to have matching slots instead of having one modern and one legacy slot. Also out of the four 5d cameras we have 2 with dual slots. We also have a 1dxii with mismatched slots. I would not consider dual matching slots to be a way separate the lines.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 2, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> It is not unrealistic to expect a dual slot camera to have matching slots instead of having one modern and one legacy slot. Also out of the four 5d cameras we have 2 with dual slots. We also have a 1dxii with mismatched slots. I would not consider dual matching slots to be a way separate the lines.


It is unrealistic to expect when you've already been told it ain't going to happen. None of the 5D series cameras have matching card slots. Yes, it would have been nice, but not happening. Continuing to gripe is not only unrealistic, it is unhinged.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 2, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> Why not 2 CFE cards? For the few bucks in the scheme of things it would be best. Buy 2 CFE cards and be done with it. It is not like you go out and buy a new card every week or even month.


One very good reason, as has already been pointed out is that SD cards are available almost everywhere. If you find yourself in an emergency situation where your cards are lost/stolen/forgotten/full you can walk into any corner drugstore and buy an SD card that will work in the slot. I expect Canon took that into consideration.


----------



## reef58 (Mar 2, 2020)

Why don't they just put each and every feature into the R5 so folks won't have to pony up the dough for the R1 when it comes out? Sounds like a reasonable plan to me.


----------



## ozturert (Mar 2, 2020)

Bad move. R5 seems to be a powerhouse. That SD card will be a bottleneck if one uses 2 cards at the same time.
I think CF Express is compatible with XQD cards. Even the slowest XQD card is much faster than the fastest SD card and if you look at 64 and 128GB versions the cost difference isn't that huge.
Step up to CF Express and you are looking at like 5x speed difference. Huge difference.
R5 will be used for years to come and XQD and CF Express prices keep falling down.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 2, 2020)

ozturert said:


> I think CF Express is compatible with XQD cards. Even the slowest XQD card is much faster than the fastest SD card and if you look at 64 and 128GB versions the cost difference isn't that huge.



XQD slots on the Nikon's where updated with CF Express support for 'select' cards. It is pin compatible, but I don't know if CF Express slots are backwards compatible or have been made backwards compatible. Since Canon went for CFast instead of XQD I would expect they just haven't included the instructions to understand XQD. On the plus side, XQD card readers have been getting firmware updates to read CF Express so there is a good opportunity to buy these for perhaps less than a CF Express reader. I would think the firmware updated readers are still limited to XQD speed.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Mar 2, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> That example is all well and good and the R5 will likely be able to match it. But will the SD slot allow 8k recording or 4k 120fps?
> 
> I still very much feel if you put in the much slower card you'll end up with a feature limited camera, perhaps not in areas that matter to you, but they will matter to someone. I will only invest in CFE cards, SD is too up in the air until SDE or CFE type A takes over.



If the 8K codec is H.264 matching the bitrate of the GH5's H.264 8bit codec, it'd be 60-90 MBps. If it's an inefficient motion jpeg matching the rate for 4K on the 5D Mark IV, it'd look like 250 MBps. It's important to note that I'm expressing the codecs in MBps and not Mbps. 

If the camera can't run H.264 in 8K(that's a crap ton to process), then CF Expres would be necessary since it'll likely output in an inefficient codec.

And you're correct that the slower card can feature limit someone. LIkely more buffer for those shooting stills. For video people, the lower codecs will be fine initially. When the computers improve(mainly the video editing software), the camera will be ready for more video people to take advantage of it with their camera. I'm excited for the features the R5 will have, even if I won't use them for the first few years, just because it means I don't have to worry about the camera being obsolete. It's the reason I tried holding off on buying a R, the video is already about obsolete.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 2, 2020)

crazyrunner33 said:


> If the 8K codec is H.264 matching the bitrate of the GH5's H.264 8bit codec, it'd be 60-90 MBps. If it's an inefficient motion jpeg matching the rate for 4K on the 5D Mark IV, it'd look like 250 MBps. It's important to note that I'm expressing the codecs in MBps and not Mbps.
> 
> If the camera can't run H.264 in 8K(that's a crap ton to process), then CF Expres would be necessary since it'll likely output in an inefficient codec.
> 
> And you're correct that the slower card can feature limit someone. LIkely more buffer for those shooting stills. For video people, the lower codecs will be fine initially. When the computers improve(mainly the video editing software), the camera will be ready for more video people to take advantage of it with their camera. I'm excited for the features the R5 will have, even if I won't use them for the first few years, just because it means I don't have to worry about the camera being obsolete. It's the reason I tried holding off on buying a R, the video is already about obsolete.



It might be 8k RAW as that should be less process intensive but eat memory cards by the dozen. We'll have to wait and see, and I will likely never even switch this or indeed any camera into video. My main thing is to see if this can be the gateway drug into the RF world, certainly as a pro it'll have at least one CFE slot so I can start collecting cards and updating my storage and readers.

As an aside, I am well versed in Mb/s and MB/s. I think a lot of people would be less impressed if their broadband providers quoted the MB/s of their connection.


----------



## 20Dave (Mar 2, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> Why not 2 CFE cards? For the few bucks in the scheme of things it would be best. Buy 2 CFE cards and be done with it. It is not like you go out and buy a new card every week or even month.



Canon has enough experience selling cameras with mismatched dual-card slots (all 5D series) and cameras with matching dual-card slots (1DX) to make an informed decision as to what the market bears. While I'm a bit surprised at the amount of angst on having mismatched slots, I believe that there would have been a bigger outcry if they were both CFExpress due to cost concerns.


----------



## sanj (Mar 2, 2020)

unfocused said:


> One very good reason, as has already been pointed out is that SD cards are available almost everywhere. If you find yourself in an emergency situation where your cards are lost/stolen/forgotten/full you can walk into any corner drugstore and buy an SD card that will work in the slot. I expect Canon took that into consideration.


You forgot damaged. Failure happens. It is just a HDD.


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 2, 2020)

reef58 said:


> Why don't they just put each and every feature into the R5 so folks won't have to pony up the dough for the R1 when it comes out? Sounds like a reasonable plan to me.



And do not forget that price has to be less than $1000 Or I am leaving the country.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 2, 2020)

So another quick way to look at this is to compare this rumor to the competition:

Split Card Slots (XQD + UHS II):

Nikon D850
Dual Card Slots- (2x UHS II):

Sony A9II
Sony A7RIV
Nikon 780
Single Card Slot (1x XQD):

Nikon Z7/Z6
Quick survey of the competition and I would call the rumored spec of CFE + UHS II as "class leading." I do expect someone in the next few years to offer dual XQD, or something like that, and leap frog the R5. But, at the moment, I would rather have CFE over XQD, and CFE + UHS II over 2x UHS II.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 2, 2020)

docsmith said:


> So another quick way to look at this is to compare this rumor to the competition:



The z6/7 have one XQD slot that has been firmware upgraded to CFE. They’ll need to release a new model before we know what their dual slot plans are.


----------



## canonnews (Mar 3, 2020)

sanj said:


> If it turns out that the SD card does not slow down the camera - camera writes to the CE card full speed and then finishing writing to the SD card it would be fine for me. As long as the CE card does not freeze while data is being written on SD. It writes to SD in the 'background'. Wonder if that can happen.


that's kind of impossible. it would have to have a basically unlimited RAM buffer.


----------



## canonnews (Mar 3, 2020)

crazyrunner33 said:


> If the 8K codec is H.264 matching the bitrate of the GH5's H.264 8bit codec, it'd be 60-90 MBps. If it's an inefficient motion jpeg matching the rate for 4K on the 5D Mark IV, it'd look like 250 MBps. It's important to note that I'm expressing the codecs in MBps and not Mbps.


no one does these in MB/sec transfer rates. it's always mbps .. 
what's to match on panasonic? they don't have 8K. Expect the codec to be h.265 anyways looking at the 1DX Mark III that seems to be what they will do for the 8K.


----------



## canonnews (Mar 3, 2020)

20Dave said:


> Canon has enough experience selling cameras with mismatched dual-card slots (all 5D series) and cameras with matching dual-card slots (1DX) to make an informed decision as to what the market bears. While I'm a bit surprised at the amount of angst on having mismatched slots, I believe that there would have been a bigger outcry if they were both CFExpress due to cost concerns.


it's a no win situation.

if it was dual CFE people would be ranting ... I'm not spending an extra $500 on cards for this damned camera!


----------



## Cbenedict (Mar 3, 2020)

Quackator said:


> Still I think the R is too small. And instead of that grip for the RP,
> I prefer a solid L-shape bracket with Arca compatibility any day.


L brackets are nice too. But too each their own you know.


----------



## Gloads (Mar 3, 2020)

Mark3794 said:


> Lots of detailed R5 images
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don't know if this is a legit site, however, either they have photos of two versions of the R5 (prototype and production?), or two different new R series cameras. Did anyone else notice the Smart Controller instead of the Joysitck on the third photo ?

Also, what is the hole (rear microphone?) in the lcd pullout slot?


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Mar 3, 2020)

Gloads said:


> Don't know if this is a legit site, however, either they have photos of two versions of the R5 (prototype and production?), or two different new R series cameras. Did anyone else notice the Smart Controller instead of the Joysitck on the third photo ?
> 
> Also, what is the hole (rear microphone?) in the lcd pullout slot?



In the third photo that's just a front on view of the joystick, not a smart controller at all to my eyes..


----------



## Gloads (Mar 3, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> In the third photo that's just a front on view of the joystick, not a smart controller at all to my eyes..


Okay, when zoomed in I see the edges, and the textured center is apparent, instead of a touch sensor. Guess it was wishful thinking on my part.


----------



## uri.raz (Mar 3, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> What on earth do you mean? I think your on the wrong thread, this is about Canon EOS R5 and what memory Canon will use plus the new cloud based storage medium they are launching.



You described the cloud based storage in very complimentary way. I noted it has downsides, e.g. it might be hacked in order to leak private photos, delete valuable photos, etc.


----------



## Starting out EOS R (Mar 3, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> You described the cloud based storage in very complimentary way. I noted it has downsides, e.g. it might be hacked in order to leak private photos, delete valuable photos, etc.


Aah, that makes more sense, as it looked a little bit of an odd off topic comment out of context.


----------



## Viggo (Mar 3, 2020)

Gloads said:


> Don't know if this is a legit site, however, either they have photos of two versions of the R5 (prototype and production?), or two different new R series cameras. Did anyone else notice the Smart Controller instead of the Joysitck on the third photo ?
> 
> Also, what is the hole (rear microphone?) in the lcd pullout slot?


Looks like a poor dummy, seriously dodgy construction, the gaps and fittings are not those of a finished model. But it looks right although I’ll miss the Touch Bar...


----------



## Sharlin (Mar 3, 2020)

canonnews said:


> it's a no win situation.
> 
> if it was dual CFE people would be ranting ... I'm not spending an extra $500 on cards for this damned camera!



The only solution: DUAL dual card slots. QUADRUPLE card slots!


----------



## gmon750 (Mar 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> It is insane we gotten to the point when someone takes a pass on a camera due to memory cards, when the rumor suggest the card slots will be class leading, but I guess by not far enough. What are you using now that is better or adequate? Have we really gotten to the point where UHSII cards are too slow for our needs?



So what's good for you surely must be good for everyone else then? 

I use a Canon 5DM3. I do professional PAID photography where I'm taking hundreds of shots in one shoot. My camera often stalls as the buffer gets full. Yes, I take that many shots. While the camera clears the buffer, the action in front of me does not stop.

The 5DM3 is a 22MP camera. If the R5 rumor points to a 45MP camera, then those SD cards (even the latest) will not be fast enough to handle that kind of bandwidth. 

If you're happy with old tech, good for you. Don't harp on others that have a genuine need to have a camera that can keep up with its user. You really come across as crass.


----------



## reef58 (Mar 3, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> So what's good for you surely must be good for everyone else then?
> 
> I use a Canon 5DM3. I do professional PAID photography where I'm taking hundreds of shots in one shoot. My camera often stalls as the buffer gets full. Yes, I take that many shots. While the camera clears the buffer, the action in front of me does not stop.
> 
> ...



My question was when did CFE and SDII cards become old tech? I could understand if they went with CF cards. They are basically giving the most advanced card setup in the class and it is being characterized as old tech. I realize this topic is about the cards the camera will likely have but based on the fact the "slow" card is faster than the two cards provided in the 5d4 and your MK3 combined it seems like a good upgrade. 

Also keep in mind this is not the top of the line model. If it were I would still disagree with the assessment of this being old tech, but I would probably not even respond to the thread. If they give you every feature in the R5 what will be left for the R1? If they gave dual CFE cards then there would be a 20 page thread about the processors not being fast enough, or some other item not up to spec.

I wanted a fast camera so I bought the 1dx3. If you want the latest and greatest the R1 will be coming.


----------



## bbb34 (Mar 3, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> The 5DM3 is a 22MP camera. If the R5 rumor points to a 45MP camera, then those SD cards (even the latest) will not be fast enough to handle that kind of bandwidth.



5D3 supports SD, SDHC, and SDXC. It apparently uses an "SD High-Speed" bus, that limits the bandwidth to 25 MB/s. Benchmarking with Magic Lantern results in a net bandwidth of 20 to 21 MB/s.

The R5 is believed to support UHS-II, which limits the bandwidth to 312 MB/s. That is over 12 times the theoretical bandwidth of the 5D3 SD bus.


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 3, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> So what's good for you surely must be good for everyone else then?
> 
> I use a Canon 5DM3. I do professional PAID photography where I'm taking hundreds of shots in one shoot. My camera often stalls as the buffer gets full. Yes, I take that many shots. While the camera clears the buffer, the action in front of me does not stop.
> 
> ...


with all due respect, you are incorrect.
5DIII SD card write speed is only around 25MB/s
5DIV SD card write speed is around 180MB/s

you are not comparing apples to apples.


----------



## koenkooi (Mar 3, 2020)

bbb34 said:


> 5D3 supports SD, SDHC, and SDXC. It apparently uses an "SD High-Speed" bus, that limits the bandwidth to 25 MB/s. Benchmarking with Magic Lantern results in a net bandwidth of 20 to 21 MB/s.
> 
> The R5 is believed to support UHS-II, which limits the bandwidth to 312 MB/s. That is over 12 times the theoretical bandwidth of the 5D3 SD bus.



IIRC the M50 was the first Canon camera that would do more than 40MiB/s writes to an SD cards, the R, RP, M6II and 90D do a lot better.

FWIW, with Magic Lanterns SD overclock feature my original M can do 55MiB/s writes, very handy for 10-bit RAW video near HD resolutions.


----------



## reef58 (Mar 3, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> with all due respect, you are incorrect.
> 5DIII SD card write speed is only around 25MB/s
> 5DIV SD card write speed is around 180MB/s
> 
> you are not comparing apples to apples.



Not to mention the R5 is double the megapixels and frame rate.


----------



## Architect1776 (Mar 3, 2020)

unfocused said:


> One very good reason, as has already been pointed out is that SD cards are available almost everywhere. If you find yourself in an emergency situation where your cards are lost/stolen/forgotten/full you can walk into any corner drugstore and buy an SD card that will work in the slot. I expect Canon took that into consideration.



I am sure but still disappointed.


----------



## Architect1776 (Mar 3, 2020)

20Dave said:


> Canon has enough experience selling cameras with mismatched dual-card slots (all 5D series) and cameras with matching dual-card slots (1DX) to make an informed decision as to what the market bears. While I'm a bit surprised at the amount of angst on having mismatched slots, I believe that there would have been a bigger outcry if they were both CFExpress due to cost concerns.



If cost were a concern then you cannot afford the R5 and the lenses to go with it.   
I know they will make it work as usual, just do not like having to use two different format means of storage.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> My question was when did CFE and SDII cards become old tech?



CFE is brand new. SDII is the last hurrah of SD cards before CFE Type A or SDE takes over. It might have just been released, but that doesn't change that SDII is just a way to push a little more life into a old standard. But it is fine just now, it is not ideal to me as I would like to have seen the R5 with both feet in the future. When the R5II comes out I would expect it to have dual CFE(dual a, dual b, or a+b) or CFE + SDE.


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> Not to mention the R5 is double the megapixels and frame rate.


Yes and at least 8 times the write speed of SD card 5D3 and much deeper buffer. 
What’s you point anyway? Your 5D3 use case is irrelevant due to SD technology and buffer in it not comparable to modern SD tech and deep buffers.


----------



## reef58 (Mar 3, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> CFE is brand new. SDII is the last hurrah of SD cards before CFE Type A or SDE takes over. It might have just been released, but that doesn't change that SDII is just a way to push a little more life into a old standard. But it is fine just now, it is not ideal to me as I would like to have seen the R5 with both feet in the future. When the R5II comes out I would expect it to have dual CFE(dual a, dual b, or a+b) or CFE + SDE.



Yes but by then everyone will be complaining the CFE's are old tech. Keeps the forums interesting I guess.


----------



## reef58 (Mar 3, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Yes and at least 8 times the write speed of SD card 5D3 and much deeper buffer.
> What’s you point anyway? Your 5D3 use case is irrelevant due to SD technology and buffer in it not comparable to modern SD tech and deep buffers.



I think you have me confused with someone else. I don't have a 5d3 and have no issues with the card selection for the r5. I was merely pointing out the r5 has twice the resolution and frame rate of his 5d3, so obviously it is a much more advanced camera.


----------



## arbitrage (Mar 3, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> There's no war, just unrealistic expectations. This is especially true since there never has been a matched card 5 series, ever. The 1DX Mark III is the first with matched cards from Canon. If there was a war, you've already lost. Ain't happening.



Actually the Canon 1DX was the first Canon camera with matched cards (dual CF)...the 1DXIII is the second. But I agree that expecting matched cards in the R5 would have only come about with dual UHS-II SD. They weren't ever going to be able to cram in matched CFE cards. None of the other fast formats are being produced yet (Type A CFE or SDE or UHS-III SD) so no way Canon would throw those in for a camera supposedly only 5 months away.

Sure, if I had a choice I'd want matched CFE cards but I was never expecting it. If and when Type A CFE cards become a thing (we don't know if they ever will) or SDExpress cards become a thing then we may see matching faster slots in this size of mirrorless camera. Hopefully when Canon produce an "R1" they will increase the body size a little bit in order to accommodated matched Type B CFExpress.


----------



## mpeeps (Mar 3, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> i did read your post, otherwise I would not asked the question I asked. however. I formed the question incorrectly. I typically record to both card fro redundancy. when writing to the same card with RAW +JPG, do you use OOC JPG for an instant image delivery to your client?


I'm not a pro. I use jpg ooc, especially with R as Windows can't preview new CR3 files which is aggravating. I use DPP to preview and then import in LR the raws I like. Laborious. But I have lots of time as a retired teacher!! Thanks for clarification. Take care.


----------



## canonnews (Mar 3, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> The only solution: DUAL dual card slots. QUADRUPLE card slots!


they'd still complain because it doesn't support compact flash and memory stick cards


----------



## uri.raz (Mar 3, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> CFE is brand new. SDII is the last hurrah of SD cards before CFE Type A or SDE takes over. It might have just been released, but that doesn't change that SDII is just a way to push a little more life into a old standard. But it is fine just now, it is not ideal to me as I would like to have seen the R5 with both feet in the future. When the R5II comes out I would expect it to have dual CFE(dual a, dual b, or a+b) or CFE + SDE.



CFExpress type A supports one lane, hence as fast as SD express, except with no backward compatibility to SD cards. Yes, that backward compatibility is limited to 104 MB/s (still good enough for v90 video), but I can't see camera manufacturers pushing CFE type A over SDE.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 3, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> CFExpress type A supports one lane, hence as fast as SD express, except with no backward compatibility to SD cards. Yes, that backward compatibility is limited to 104 MB/s (still good enough for v90 video), but I can't see camera manufacturers pushing CFE type A over SDE.



I agree with you. SD is a strong brand and I can easily see SDE taking off in a big way. CFE Type A and C may never take off, A is going to be a like for like with SDE in size and then C competes in areas where a super fast off the shelf SSD can be used. CFE Type B has strong support between Canon and Nikon so it will be much less of a hassle when switching bodies than trying to find a CFast or XQD card.


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 3, 2020)

reef58 said:


> I think you have me confused with someone else. I don't have a 5d3 and have no issues with the card selection for the r5. I was merely pointing out the r5 has twice the resolution and frame rate of his 5d3, so obviously it is a much more advanced camera.


Yup, my apologies. my bad.


----------



## cayenne (Mar 3, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> CFE is brand new. SDII is the last hurrah of SD cards before CFE Type A or SDE takes over. It might have just been released, but that doesn't change that SDII is just a way to push a little more life into a old standard. But it is fine just now, it is not ideal to me as I would like to have seen the R5 with both feet in the future. When the R5II comes out I would expect it to have dual CFE(dual a, dual b, or a+b) or CFE + SDE.



What's the difference between CFE "A" and CFE "B"....?

Thanks in advance,

C


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 3, 2020)

cayenne said:


> What's the difference between CFE "A" and CFE "B"....?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> C




Type A is sized with a SD card and has 1 lane PCIe and tops off at 1GB/s
Type B is pin compatible with XQD and used 2 lanes of PCIe and tops off at 2GB/s
(for completeness) Type C is larger and has 4 lanes of PCIe and tops of at 4GB/s 

Speed is at time of writing, we'll have newer gen PCIe protocols that'll allow faster read and write. Basically it is the natural progression of CF which has traditionally followed computers. CF = IDE, CFast = Sata, CFExpress = PCIe/m.2


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 3, 2020)

Canon by now should be including in-camera Lightroom and an editing stylus. When are they going to catch up with the competition? So disappointed.


----------



## koenkooi (Mar 3, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> Canon by now should be including in-camera Lightroom and an editing stylus. When are they going to catch up with the competition? So disappointed.



I realize you're joking, but the existing in-camera editor in the R/RP/M6II is pretty nifty, especially if you just want to quickly send an image to a wifi printer and need to crop/rotate/etc a bit.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 3, 2020)

canonnews said:


> they'd still complain because it doesn't support compact flash and memory stick cards


You got something against 8-Track?


----------



## gmon750 (Mar 3, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> with all due respect, you are incorrect.
> 5DIII SD card write speed is only around 25MB/s
> 5DIV SD card write speed is around 180MB/s
> 
> you are not comparing apples to apples.



Did you accidentally quote my post? I’m not referring to SD write speeds am not comparing them.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 3, 2020)

Ok....since this is the thread that got me looking, my UHS II card for the Canon M6 II came in yesterday. I ran a few tests. The UHS I card I had in there tested at ~69 MB/sec write speed or 2.1 fps of full RAW images after the buffer was filled. That test was 2 days ago.

So that I could compare directly, I just reran the test. 1/125 sec, f 4.5 (love them EFm lenses), ISO 400. Fully charged battery, freshly formated cards (low level), both cards are Sandisk ExtremePro, file size was ~35.2 MB:

UHS I card (it is a few years old) after buffer was filled (1.6 sec): 1.7 fps, 60.8 MB/sec.
USH II card (brand new) after buffer was filled (1.7 sec): 3.3 fps, 117 MB/sec.
Much of this is for my own benefit. But the key point relevant to this discussion, write rates can be well below theoretical and, from a practical standpoint, those really are not that different to me, 1.6 fps or 3.3 fps. Both are pretty bad. Which goes to my ultimate conclusion from this thread. If I buy an R5, and if I want the performance of 12 fps, I will be turning off the SD card slot unless it has a nicely sized buffer (still TBD).


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 3, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> Did you accidentally quote my post? I’m not referring to SD write speeds am not comparing them.


No, it was not an accident. 

You implied that because your 5D3 frequently stalls in continuous shooting mode due to SD cards, Therefore SD cards in R5 will not be able handle 45Mb files either. :

+++++++ The 5DM3 is a 22MP camera. If the R5 rumor points to a 45MP camera, then those SD cards (even the latest) will not be fast enough to handle that kind of bandwidth

Well, Your experience with 5D3 SD cards is true as 5D3 SD controller maximum speed is only 25Mb/S. 5D4 SD controller speed was increased up to 180Mb/s

Other important metric is : buffer size 
5D3 buffer is 6-7 shots (RAW) deep. Quite shallow 
5D4 buffer can fit up to 20 RAW shots. 

Therefore: your 5D3 use case is not strictly relevant for R5 SD card performance projections. 
I hope it explains.


----------



## gmon750 (Mar 3, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> No, it was not an accident.
> 
> You implied that because your 5D3 frequently stalls in continuous shooting mode due to SD cards, Therefore SD cards in R5 will not be able handle 45Mb files either. :
> 
> ...



I did not say that SD cards in the R5 is incapable of handling 45MB files. Of course they are. 

What I was saying that in MY use case, the shooting I do will saturate the buffer and hit a limit with any SD cards write speed. Even the 5D4's buffer I would saturate quickly. Add 45MB RAW shots and that makes What I shoot is almost as speed-necessary as a sports photographer and as our shoots are quite expensive and with that kind of money involved, I might lose that moment. 

I don't get why my original statement triggers you. My use case is not yours. If your style of shooting does not stall the camera, well then hats off to you. You get a gold star. Not everyone is like you. For others, it's a legitimate concern and frankly, does not need explaining. I'm not discounting the R5 before it's even out of the gate. I'll see what real-world performance does with that kind of setup. Obviously it will work for a majority of users. Great. I'm not a "majority". 

No mirrorless camera to-date have impressed me enough to move off my 5D3. I almost bought a 5D4 but then decided to hold off as rumors of a 5D mirrorless-equivalent started to circulate.


----------



## canonnews (Mar 4, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> I did not say that SD cards in the R5 is incapable of handling 45MB files. Of course they are.
> 
> What I was saying that in MY use case, the shooting I do will saturate the buffer and hit a limit with any SD cards write speed. Even the 5D4's buffer I would saturate quickly. Add 45MB RAW shots and that makes What I shoot is almost as speed-necessary as a sports photographer and as our shoots are quite expensive and with that kind of money involved, I might lose that moment.



then the R5 is not the camera for you. Not every camera that Canon creates is supposed to be a sports photographer's dream camera.

The 5D Mark IV was never meant to replace the 1DX Mark II. I'm not sure why some feel this camera should replace what will ultimately end up as a 1 series
camera for the RF mount.

This isn't it.

God knows why you think a 5D Mark III is better if your use case is as demanding and challenging and fast paced as you say it is though. I mean you could get a used 1DX or a 1DX Mark II that would serve you far better, and then your statements would at least make more logical sense. I mean you are using a 5D Mark III that barely has a buffer, uses slow CF cards and even slower SD card slot to make your argument. Thus probably the comments directed at you.

and finally - the SD card slot in the R5 btw, will be faster than ANY card slot in your 5D Mark III. Just an FYI


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 4, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> I did not say that SD cards in the R5 is incapable of handling 45MB files. Of course they are.
> 
> What I was saying that in MY use case, the shooting I do will saturate the buffer and hit a limit with any SD cards write speed. Even the 5D4's buffer I would saturate quickly. Add 45MB RAW shots and that makes What I shoot is almost as speed-necessary as a sports photographer and as our shoots are quite expensive and with that kind of money involved, I might lose that moment.
> 
> ...



++++++ I did not say that SD cards in the R5 is incapable of handling 45MB files. Of course they are.

really? this is exactly what you said:

"... The 5DM3 is a 22MP camera.* If the R5 rumor points to a 45MP camera, then those SD cards (even the latest) will not be fast enough to handle that kind of bandwidth ..."*


The use case you described is way above what 5D3 is capable of supporting of. I am not even sure why you bother holding to a 5D series camera body if your use case is what you described. Even writing to a single CF card will get you no more that 11 shots until 5D3 buffer will reach full capacity. 5D4 is a bit better in that regard but still its not a sport camera like a
1D series rig.
To be correct, I objected your position that : because if SD card is slow in your 5D3, it won’t be up to task in R5 either.
SD tech in 5D4 and R5 is A completely different tech to the one in your 5D3. 8 times faster.
Shooting with 5D3 a fast action with long bursts that saturate buffet really quickly and on expensive shoots sounds mega awkward to me. You rig is just not up to speed even with a single CF card in there. Let alone writing to two cards simultaneously.
I shoot with a pair of 5D4 bodies continuously when required but in short bursts of no more that 8-10 shots at a time. That’s about a second and a half worth of action.
However, 5D4 allows up to 2.5 seconds of continuous high speed shooting to both cards before you reach buffer saturation. That’s from experience.

So .. your understanding of UHS - II capabilities in Canon modern cameras is a little bit misaligned.


----------



## ozturert (Mar 4, 2020)

canonnews said:


> it's a no win situation.
> 
> if it was dual CFE people would be ranting ... I'm not spending an extra $500 on cards for this damned camera!



128GB CF Express card with 1700MB/s read and 1200MB/s write speed is 199 in Amazon. Fastest 128GB SD card is around 142USD today (Lexar) and it has 300 MB/s read speed. 6 times faster but only 45USD more expensive.

You will buy a state-of-the art camera and be content with slow SD cards?


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 4, 2020)

ozturert said:


> 128GB CF Express card with 1700MB/s read and 1200MB/s write speed is 199 in Amazon. Fastest 128GB SD card is around 142USD today (Lexar) and it has 300 MB/s read speed. 6 times faster but only 45USD more expensive.
> 
> You will buy a state-of-the art camera and be content with slow SD cards?



In the UK too
Sandisk CF Express Extreme Pro 128GB 1700MB/s Read Speed, 1200MB/s Write Speed @ £299.99
Sandisk 128GB Extreme Pro SDHC Card 300MB/s Read Speed, 260MB/s Write Speed @ £265.00 reduced from £325.99

These UHS-II cards are really expensive for what they bring.


----------



## ozturert (Mar 4, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> In the UK too
> Sandisk CF Express Extreme Pro 128GB 1700MB/s Read Speed, 1200MB/s Write Speed @ £299.99
> Sandisk 128GB Extreme Pro SDHC Card 300MB/s Read Speed, 260MB/s Write Speed @ £265.00 reduced from £325.99
> 
> These UHS-II cards are really expensive for what they bring.


Exactly. CF Express is actually coming faster thatn I thought. I bought 64GB XQD for my Z6 and I cannot believe the speed of flushing the buffer memory. People pay huge amounts of money for their new cameras and still try to stick with their ancient cards just because they have it. Last week a friend of mine was saying her D850 was too slow and locks frequently. I went into menus, tried to reset things, checked firmware etc... but it was still slow. Then I saw that she was using an old SD card (45MB/sn). I asked her to buy 64GB Sony XQD card and now she is so happy. Even a faster UHS-II card would be good but price of XQD cards keep falling day by day and the difference isn't huge even today.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 4, 2020)

ozturert said:


> Exactly. CF Express is actually coming faster thatn I thought. I bought 64GB XQD for my Z6 and I cannot believe the speed of flushing the buffer memory. People pay huge amounts of money for their new cameras and still try to stick with their ancient cards just because they have it. Last week a friend of mine was saying her D850 was too slow and locks frequently. I went into menus, tried to reset things, checked firmware etc... but it was still slow. Then I saw that she was using an old SD card (45MB/sn). I asked her to buy 64GB Sony XQD card and now she is so happy. Even a faster UHS-II card would be good but price of XQD cards keep falling day by day and the difference isn't huge even today.



You can firmware upgrade that Z6 to support CFExpress cards. Not that your XQD card is suddenly dead, just if you are buying new cards I would go with CFE.


----------



## tpatana (Mar 4, 2020)

gmon750 said:


> Did you accidentally quote my post? I’m not referring to SD write speeds am not comparing them.



years ago I did speed test for CF cards on 5D3. The difference was huge between cards. Test was to see how many pictures it takes when you jam down the shutter button for 30 seconds. Results:

Lexar Professional 1066x 64GB: 137
Kingston Elite Pro 8 GB 133x: 40
A-Data 4GB 120x: 36
Patriot Signature 16 GB 266x: 31

Exact same cards (same settings etc.) on 1DX (Mark1):

Lexar Professional 1066x 64GB: 171
Kingston Elite Pro 8 GB 133x: 71
A-Data 4GB 120x: 65
Patriot Signature 16 GB 266x: 59


----------



## tpatana (Mar 4, 2020)

ozturert said:


> 128GB CF Express card with 1700MB/s read and 1200MB/s write speed is 199 in Amazon. Fastest 128GB SD card is around 142USD today (Lexar) and it has 300 MB/s read speed. 6 times faster but only 45USD more expensive.
> 
> You will buy a state-of-the art camera and be content with slow SD cards?



Most sports days I carry ~500GB of CF cards just in case, although typically I shoot ~200GB per day. Next year world champs I'm planning to have 2-3 assistants, so total 3-4 bodies. 3 full days of shooting, although plan is to offload the pics to external SSD every night. I'm expecting 600-1000GB pictures per day. For sure I'll have at least one 1DX3, and maybe one R5 if it proves to be good enough. So most likely need to carry ~600GB+ of CFE. That's plenty of money for a hobby... (although I already got the cards  )


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 4, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Most sports days I carry ~500GB of CF cards just in case, although typically I shoot ~200GB per day. Next year world champs I'm planning to have 2-3 assistants, so total 3-4 bodies. 3 full days of shooting, although plan is to offload the pics to external SSD every night. I'm expecting 600-1000GB pictures per day. For sure I'll have at least one 1DX3, and maybe one R5 if it proves to be good enough. So most likely need to carry ~600GB+ of CFE. That's plenty of money for a hobby... (although I already got the cards  )



If that SSD is fast enough and connected via TB3 you'll be able to empty those CFE cards super fast. Per 128 GB card it should be about 1 minute and 20odd seconds. (8 minutes per card for comparison to the fastest UHS-II card). This is assuming you have cracker of a card reader and your SSD 2GB/s or faster at writes.


----------



## tpatana (Mar 4, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> If that SSD is fast enough and connected via TB3 you'll be able to empty those CFE cards super fast. Per 128 GB card it should be about 1 minute and 20odd seconds. (8 minutes per card for comparison to the fastest UHS-II card). This is assuming you have cracker of a card reader and your SSD 2GB/s or faster at writes.



Yea it's not too much time, just need to make sure everything gets copied and mirrored before wiping the cards for next day.

Last time CF -> (laptop in the middle) -> external HDD took about 4 minutes per 64GB card. Do it twice per card to mirror, so 8 minute per 64GB. I had some 300-400GB per day so it was roughly one hour while enjoying beer and some evening snack before hitting the bed. I don't expect this to be much different with CFE -> SSD transfer.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 4, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Yea it's not too much time, just need to make sure everything gets copied and mirrored before wiping the cards for next day.
> 
> Last time CF -> (laptop in the middle) -> external HDD took about 4 minutes per 64GB card. Do it twice per card to mirror, so 8 minute per 64GB. I had some 300-400GB per day so it was roughly one hour while enjoying beer and some evening snack before hitting the bed. I don't expect this to be much different with CFE -> SSD transfer.



I am perhaps spoiled by super fast everything.


----------



## cosmopotter (Mar 5, 2020)

yoms said:


> Do you think there's a chance we'll see an extension grip for the R5 as the RP has the EG-E1? Thanks.


It’ll have a real grip like the EOS R not the RP plate.


----------



## cosmopotter (Mar 5, 2020)

Perfect! A modern version of the 5D4, 5D3, etc. Exactly what I want.


----------



## nicolas.det (Mar 5, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> why is a UHS-II SD slot suddenly useless?



I consider the CFExpress useless has most need about a 500 €/$ investeissement to get started, there is no CDExpress built in any computers..


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 5, 2020)

nicolas.det said:


> I consider the CFExpress useless has most need about a 500 €/$ investeissement to get started, there is no CDExpress built in any computers..



Usually only lower end computers have SD slots built in, and they are rarely as fast as an external reader. So you would be plugging a "slow" card into a even slower port, at that point just plug the camera directly into the computer.


----------



## ozturert (Mar 5, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Most sports days I carry ~500GB of CF cards just in case, although typically I shoot ~200GB per day. Next year world champs I'm planning to have 2-3 assistants, so total 3-4 bodies. 3 full days of shooting, although plan is to offload the pics to external SSD every night. I'm expecting 600-1000GB pictures per day. For sure I'll have at least one 1DX3, and maybe one R5 if it proves to be good enough. So most likely need to carry ~600GB+ of CFE. That's plenty of money for a hobby... (although I already got the cards  )


Then you have money to pay the delta to get 6x more performance


----------



## ozturert (Mar 5, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> You can firmware upgrade that Z6 to support CFExpress cards. Not that your XQD card is suddenly dead, just if you are buying new cards I would go with CFE.


I did the upgrade. I have 64GB XQD card now and it is plenty fast for what I do. I am thinking to get a 128GB CF Express in 1-2 months now though.


----------



## tpatana (Mar 5, 2020)

ozturert said:


> Then you have money to pay the delta to get 6x more performance



I have money to buy Ferrari. That doesn't mean it makes sense, or I should do it. As mentioned above, I hate that logic of having money means you should spend it on expensive things.

Yes, I'll be buying 1dx3 and I already have CFE cards, but I still have right to say the cards are unfortunately expensive. I shoot sport with RAW on 1DX using CF cards, and I've never hit buffer limit. New video modes make sense to have CFE, but again it doesn't make the cards any cheaper if it makes sense to have that type of cards.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

richperson said:


> I'm glad they have two different slots. The small slot for JPEG backups is nice. Also nice in those times when you want to record raw on the main card, but JPEG on the small card for ability to hand the card immediately to someone with a reader to print/transfer the file. If you had two CFExpress slots then you would have to bring the bulky reader with you or plug to the camera.



How'd that work out in the 5D Mark III and 5D Mark IV? Even when recording only jpeg to the slower SD card, the camera's burst rate slows down compared to when only recording to to a fast UDMA-7 CF card.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

richperson said:


> I don't think this is totally accurate. It sounds like you are assuming raw to both cards, which I don't know why you would do that. If you shoot raw to the fast card and JPEG to the small card it shouldn't impact the buffer significantly should it?



It did with the 5DIII, 5DIV, and 7DII...


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

Bennymiata said:


> I think Canon has done the right thing.
> A UHS II card can easily record 450mb/sec on my R.
> Forcing people to buy 2 CFExpress cards for their new camera would hold some people back from buying as they are expensive.



450 mbs is only 56.25 MB/s.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

Nelu said:


> I really don't know what the hell is wrong with people today...
> Guys, if you have money, get the CRExpress card and the SD card.
> If you don't have enough money for a CFEpress card (after you just paid around $4000 for the camera, LOL), then don't buy it. Buy the SD card instead.
> It's a simple as that. You have options and it's still not OK???



What about those who would rather buy two CFExpress cards so the camera doesn't bog down sooner when saving to both cards? What can they do to use two cards at the camera's fastest burst rate?


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

jdavidse said:


> There was a test of the 5D IV years ago that showed if you write RAW to both cards it is faster compared to if you write RAW to one and Jpeg to another. Presumably this was because the camera has to use processing power to create the jpeg. This could be moot with all the updated horsepower but it's something to check out when you get one.



Yeah, but it was still a lot slower than writing raw to only a fast CF card. It was about the same speed as writing raw to only the slower card.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

jam05 said:


> It will throttled back to write a the slower speed which would be a waste of the CFexpress 1gbs speed. One would only write to the CFexpress with the SD empty. Or else 2 SD cards.



There can be a card in the slower slot. As long as it is not being written to the other slot will still run at its faster speed.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Nope, RAW (large file ) to CF Express and JPG (smaller) to SD. RAW is what about 4 times larger than JPG?



That's not the way it worked out with the 5D Mark III, 5D Mark IV, and 7D Mark II. Even when writing raw to the faster CF card and only JPEG to the slower SD card, the burst rate was impacted significantly compared to just writing raw to the CF card.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Because with the slower SD installed and the CFexpress also, max speed equals to that of the slower card. One will never get dual CFexpress bus speed. Thus one would have to remove the SD card for that CFexpress bus speed



One only has to turn it off. It can remain placed in the slot in the camera.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

David the street guy said:


> And why should this be the only possible rule? Why couldn't we imagine a scenario in which the SD card is only used when the CFexpress card is full? Or only as a backup, which doesn't have to be as fast as the main card. Or only to store jpeg?
> 
> Why limit our imagination to what we believe to be true?



Because of past experience with the 5D Mark III, 5D Mark IV, and 7D Mark II?


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

slclick said:


> Never once in using the 5D3 for almost 8 years did I have issues or even think about having mixed slots. I truly love the problems of being a stills shooter over myriad of issues video people have. We win.



It makes a noticeable difference shooting sports with the 7D Mark II. The fastest UDMA-7 CF cards write at about 100 MB/s, the fastest UHS-I SD cards write at about 75 MB/s in it. The buffer gets full and slows down in fewer shots using the SD slot than the CF slot when saving raw.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Please explain: "(I'm still betting the 20FPS is going to be JPEG or HEIF only)"
> JPEG and cr3 on the R is hardly different in size. While JPEG needs to be encoded, cr3 doesn't ...



.cr3 include a jpeg preview image that must be encoded, too.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

Antono Refa said:


> There are UHS-II cards that can be read at 300MB/s. What drive can have data written to it at that speed? Then, nobody can post process images at 12 / 20 fps, so what does it matter anyway?



I don't think anyone is having a problem with the read speed of any card when talking about slots in cameras. They're talking about _write_ speeds.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 7, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> I don't know camera architecture, but you could potentially use a dual bus and dedicated memory to deal with the slower speed of the SD card. I doubt Canon is going to release a high end camera that degrades the performance to the lower value. I have used this approach with my 1dx II (granted with a CFast card) when I wasn't carrying a laptop on the trip. I didn't use the approach that often since I didn't want to buy a lot of CFast cards for backup:
> 
> Buy 2 128GB Cfexpress cards
> Slot 1 (Cfexpress) 128GB Write RAW
> ...



Let us know if the CFExpress slot still transfers data at its native speed or if it is throttled to the same transfer speed as the SD card bus...


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> A deep buffer means lots and lots of RAM, which is both expensive and power hungry. I would guess that Canon reduced the amount of RAM to make it cheaper and last longer on a single charge. So the in-memory conversion of RAW to jpeg/heif would slow down things a lot. A way around this would be to generate the jpg/heif images from the RAW files after they are stored on the CFe. That wouldn't impact burst speed, but it would make people with card-failure fears a bit twitchy.



The camera already converts the raw data to jpeg when only saving to a raw format. There's always a jpeg preview image contained on the .cr2 or .cr3 file.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

shunsai said:


> I've never experienced my 5D4 JPEGs being more than 25% of its _corresponding_ RAW file's size, and the EOS R JPEGs I have are roughly 30% of their corresponding CR3 files. My JPEGS are always set to the highest quality setting. I don't see how you're getting JPEGs that are 75% or more of their corresponding RAW file.
> 
> Can anyone else confirm this? The only time I remember seeing JPEGs comparable in size to RAW is if the JPEG was created later in camera or in software on the computer.





mb66energy said:


> I haven't seen that too but maybe you can tweak the picture styles to do that for you: High sharpening, high contrast, high color saturation that combined with highly detailed stuff - sand, crops, forests without sky might push jpeg to its limits of compression: Each pixel is different from the other and hence you have Imagesize ~ Number of pixels x 1 Byte.



Maybe in-camera HDR where three raw files are combined for one JPEG output image?


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

slclick said:


> Most folks will whine over anything and everything, I can imagine a 28 page complaint over strap lug placement.



While others will also complain about complainers...


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> I write 400 mbps video to relatively inexpensive UHS-II cards all the time and I’ve never had a problem. Seems like a lot of fuss over nothing to me. If anything I would have preferred the ability to write directly to external SSDs but for some reason we can’t get that. Not sure why.



400 mbps is only 50 MB/s


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Believe me, if there were no SD slot there would be people complaining over that too. I get that not everyone can be pleased, but there comes a point where the complaints are over wrought outrage for the sake of outrage. If I were to buy an R5 (huge if) I wouldn't be happy that I had to spend on a CFE card, but I wouldn't be crying on the forum about it page after page. It's the same mental hysteria that gives us the volumes and technical arguments over 1/2 stop of DR. 3,2,1...



Why is any opinion different from your own necessarily overwrought outrage and hysteria? Why can't it just be a differing opinion?

It's not going to ruin my life or anything, but I would prefer any R5 I might buy to have two CFExpress cards, just as I would have preferred my 5D Mark II, 7D Mark II, and 5D Mark IV to have had dual CF card slots or even dual UHS-II card slots instead of one faster CF card slot and one slower UHS-I slot that limits the write speeds of both slots to the slower bus speed of the UHS-I bus when simultaneously writing to both cards...


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

joestopper said:


> "Joe, which of your three lenses do you find yourself using most?"
> 
> I am using the 28-70 most of the time. I do not see a big difference in IQ between this and the two primes. Anyway, for all portrait work I use the 85. But for street or even landscape I am using the 28-70. I see myself using the 50 quite rarely these days (if the 28-70 had been the first lens released I would not have bought the 50)



Which is exactly why Canon released the 50mm first!


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

joestopper said:


> Because it requires lots of energy, drains your battery fast.



And when it is full you have to swap to another camera body instead of to another memory card.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

AaronT said:


> Absolutely Amazing! Specially since read speed on UHS II maxes out at 300 mb/sec and write speeds are always lower. Hypothetical max transfer speed on UHS II is 312 mb/sec. Your Canon R must have been sprinkled with some magic Pixy Dust!



400 mbs is only 50 MB/s. UHS II has a theoretical transfer speed of 312 MB/s, which is 2,496 mbps. There are eight bits (b) in one byte (B).


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

Starting out EOS R said:


> yup, the max speed of the Sandisk Extreme Pro 64GB read speed is up to 300mb/s and write speed of 260mb/s which is the important one as that is what determines how fast the buffer fills up. Thats why I was asking what card you have as 400mb/s is incredibly fast for a UHSII card



400 mbps is slow for an UHS II card. That's only 50 MB/s.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 8, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Why is any opinion different from your own necessarily overwrought outrage and hysteria? Why can't it just be a differing opinion?
> 
> It's not going to ruin my life or anything, but I would prefer any R5 I might buy to have two CFExpress cards, just as I would have preferred my 5D Mark II, 7D Mark II, and 5D Mark IV to have had dual CF card slots or even dual UHS-II card slots instead of one faster CF card slot and one slower UHS-I slot that limits the write speeds of both slots to the slower bus speed of the UHS-I bus when simultaneously writing to both cards...


Calm down, dude. Overwrought are the people having continuous (post after post) hissy fits over something they already know isn't happening. Nothing wrong with wanting two matching slots. There is plenty wrong with continuously griping over something that IS NOT HAPPENING ALREADY. Children. Now please, carry on with your next 50 overwrought nightly posts.

BTW: I never said that any post that doesn't agree with my own is overwrought... that happens to be your own characterization. Project much?

Also, I too would prefer matching cards... BUT IT AIN'T HAPPENING. No sense crying over spilled milk.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

Bahrd said:


> ??
> What's the difference between a memory on a board vs an on-card memory?



Volatile vs flash memory.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

phunguyen said:


> I don’t know why people are crazy about CFExpress cards price, they’re actually good deals, much faster cards with almost same price with ush-ii sd cards. Sandisk uhs ii 128gb is ~$200, CFExpress 128gb $200-$250.



Because they are comparing the price of CFExpress cards to the price of non UHS SD cards that only write at 30 MB/s or less instead of the ones that can write close to 300 MB/s.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> A) If its that important to you, either use one slot, or buy the EOS 1D X for its dual CFExpress slots,.
> 
> B) Until literally last month, the best you could get was dual UHS-II (312 MB/s) in Sony land, announced under 9 months ago. Yet, people are already bi***ing about it not becoming a standard.



'Ya got a link to where I can order a 45MP 1D X Mark III?


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

This_That said:


> Personally I do no video at all. Wasted tech on me. So all the discussion about the two card slots is pretty much academic despite exact one situation.
> 
> You are on travel, no camera shop near, no chance to mailorder something. Your CFExpress cards are full, no backup possible. That SD slot right there is your lifesaver. I shot with a crappy microSD card in an SD Adapter because that was the thing I can get in every mobile phone shop around the corner. Yes, slow but I was still able to shot.



So what would keep you from doing the same thing with a CFExpress to micro-SD adapter? They'll probably be out soon, too.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

slclick said:


> Panties in a bunch all over the forum over a camera body shell in an acrylic case at WPPI. We don't know enough for all this boiling blood.



It sounds like your panties are in more of a bunch over his comment than his are...


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

brad-man said:


> Do you buy your cards on Rodeo Drive?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Extreme Pro 256GB V90 cards are $400. Extreme Pro 256GB V30 cards are around $150. Those who don't understand the difference in continuous write speed between a V30 and a V90 card are mostly the ones who don't understand why two CFExpress cards would be better for many of those who do.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

neurorx said:


> . Wouldn’t this be a significant problem then for the 1DX3 live view shooting, the Sony a9 and A9ii and any future R1? All these cameras are 20 FPS or will be.. Maybe I’m not understanding something?



One can still use the mechanical shutter in live view, just as mirrorless cameras have a mechanical shutter due to rolling shutter effects. The mirror is what makes a camera a DSLR, not the mechanical shutter.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

sanj said:


> This is so true and practical. Having a camera with an SD card can be a lifesaver in extreme situations.



So could having a CF to SD adapter, or an SD to microSD adapter, or even a CFExpress to SD or microSD adapter...


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Jack, I believe he don´t understand that there are no free meals! Canonrumors guy gotta make a living! Of course he will not splash everything, even if he has more info he will make it "slice by slice". Seems to me obvious and boy, can we criticize that?
> 
> 
> About the cards....Chill out on this one! This is only a potencial problem for those who make video and will be using this camera to shoot video. For Stills purposes, there will not be a problem at all! You have great cards SD UHS-II in the market and for stills they will be more than enough.
> ...



On the other hand, for those of us who have only UHS-I SD cards we will have to buy two sets of new cards! Both CFExpress and UHS-II cards! We'll need backups in both form factors.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

reef58 said:


> Easily don't know about that. The "holy grail" on the internet the A9 uses SD. That being said I think Canon will do better with the R1. Depending on your definition of better.



The biggest complaint most α9 shooters have is having to wait for the buffer to clear after a long burst.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

BobG said:


> Sandisk 128MB UHSII SD (300MB/s)= £86
> Sandisk 128MB CFExpress (1700MB/s)= £234
> 
> So there is a fairly big difference



Check again on the rated _write_ speed of that UHS-II card. It's probably only V30 (30 MB/s) The V90 cards are much more expensive.


----------



## brad-man (Mar 8, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Extreme Pro 256GB V90 cards are $400. Extreme Pro 256GB V30 cards are around $150. Those who don't understand the difference in continuous write speed between a V30 and a V90 card are mostly the ones who don't understand why two CFExpress cards would be better for many of those who do.


The above prices in the discussion were for CFExpress cards. Your response about V30 & V90 are UHS-ll standards. Apples & oranges...


Michael Clark said:


> So could having a CF to SD adapter, or an SD to microSD adapter, or even a CFExpress to SD or microSD adapter...


You may want to consider the physical size of the cards you are talking about and see whether such an adapter is feasible...


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

sanj said:


> If it turns out that the SD card does not slow down the camera - camera writes to the CE card full speed and then finishing writing to the SD card it would be fine for me. As long as the CE card does not freeze while data is being written on SD. It writes to SD in the 'background'. Wonder if that can happen.



That's not the way Canon cameras with mismatched cards have behaved in the past. The entire camera defaults to the bus speed of the slower slot when both slots are in use.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> There's no war, just unrealistic expectations. This is especially true since there never has been a matched card 5 series, ever. The 1DX Mark III is the first with matched cards from Canon. If there was a war, you've already lost. Ain't happening.



1D X had matched CF card slots.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

unfocused said:


> One very good reason, as has already been pointed out is that SD cards are available almost everywhere. If you find yourself in an emergency situation where your cards are lost/stolen/forgotten/full you can walk into any corner drugstore and buy an SD card that will work in the slot. I expect Canon took that into consideration.



Yeah, because Canon has never released a camera with only a CF card slot, have they? 


They could just as easily have made a camera with 2 CFExpress slots and folks could use an SD to CFExpress adapter.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

reef58 said:


> Why don't they just put each and every feature into the R5 so folks won't have to pony up the dough for the R1 when it comes out? Sounds like a reasonable plan to me.



If the R1 will be 45 MP when it comes out, you may have a point. If it is closer to 20 MP like the 1D X Mark III, on the other hand...


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> You described the cloud based storage in very complimentary way. I noted it has downsides, e.g. it might be hacked in order to leak private photos, delete valuable photos, etc.



Except the cloud based storage itself wasn't really hacked. The hackers got the victims to voluntarily give them their account information by sending emails to the victims posing as "Apple Security".


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

reef58 said:


> My question was when did CFE and SDII cards become old tech? I could understand if they went with CF cards. They are basically giving the most advanced card setup in the class and it is being characterized as old tech. I realize this topic is about the cards the camera will likely have but based on the fact the "slow" card is faster than the two cards provided in the 5d4 and your MK3 combined it seems like a good upgrade.
> 
> Also keep in mind this is not the top of the line model. If it were I would still disagree with the assessment of this being old tech, but I would probably not even respond to the thread. If they give you every feature in the R5 what will be left for the R1? If they gave dual CFE cards then there would be a 20 page thread about the processors not being fast enough, or some other item not up to spec.
> 
> I wanted a fast camera so I bought the 1dx3. If you want the latest and greatest the R1 will be coming.



Will the R1 be 45 MP?


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

bbb34 said:


> 5D3 supports SD, SDHC, and SDXC. It apparently uses an "SD High-Speed" bus, that limits the bandwidth to 25 MB/s. Benchmarking with Magic Lantern results in a net bandwidth of 20 to 21 MB/s.
> 
> The R5 is believed to support UHS-II, which limits the bandwidth to 312 MB/s. That is over 12 times the theoretical bandwidth of the 5D3 SD bus.



Yeah, and Canon cameras with UHS-II slots max out at 187 MB/s, so there's also that.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> IIRC the M50 was the first Canon camera that would do more than 40MiB/s writes to an SD cards, the R, RP, M6II and 90D do a lot better.
> 
> FWIW, with Magic Lanterns SD overclock feature my original M can do 55MiB/s writes, very handy for 10-bit RAW video near HD resolutions.



The 7D Mark II writes to the fastest UHS-I SD cards at around 75 MB/s. It was out in 2014, 4 years before the M50.
The 5D Mark IV writes to the fastest UHS-I SD cards at around 79 MB/s. It was out in 2016, two years before the M50.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> with all due respect, you are incorrect.
> 5DIII SD card write speed is only around 25MB/s
> 5DIV SD card write speed is around 180MB/s
> 
> you are not comparing apples to apples.



5D Mark IV SD card write speed is about 79 MB/s.
EOS R is the one that can write at around 180 MB/s to UHS-II SD cards.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> No, it was not an accident.
> 
> You implied that because your 5D3 frequently stalls in continuous shooting mode due to SD cards, Therefore SD cards in R5 will not be able handle 45Mb files either. :
> 
> ...




The 5D Mark IV SD controller speed is on the UHS104 (UHS-1) standard of 104 MB/s. Actual write performance with the fastest cards is about 79 MB/s.

You're thinking of the EOS R that can write at around 180 MB/s with a controller on the UHS-II standard of 312MB/s.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

brad-man said:


> The above prices in the discussion were for CFExpress cards. Your response about V30 & V90 are UHS-ll standards. Apples & oranges...
> 
> You may want to consider the physical size of the cards you are talking about and see whether such an adapter is feasible...



Perhaps. There are plenty of folks here throwing around prices of V30 and V60 SD cards and acting like they're as fast as V90 cards, though.

I'm pretty sure one could make an adapter to use a microSD card in any of the above mentioned slots. MicroSD cards are what are most ubiquitous at "corner drug stores" due to their widespread use in phones.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 8, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Calm down, dude. Overwrought are the people having continuous (post after post) hissy fits over something they already know isn't happening. Nothing wrong with wanting two matching slots. There is plenty wrong with continuously griping over something that IS NOT HAPPENING ALREADY. Children. Now please, carry on with your next 50 overwrought nightly posts.
> 
> BTW: I never said that any post that doesn't agree with my own is overwrought... that happens to be your own characterization. Project much?
> 
> Also, I too would prefer matching cards... BUT IT AIN'T HAPPENING. No sense crying over spilled milk.



I'm perfectly calm. You don't have to throw such a hissy fit over my comment. You might blow a gasket.


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 8, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The 5D Mark IV SD controller speed is on the UHS104 (UHS-1) standard of 104 MB/s. Actual write performance with the fastest cards is about 79 MB/s.
> 
> You're thinking of the EOS R that can write at around 180 MB/s with a controller on the UHS-II standard of 312MB/s.


I stand corrected. So.. at least 180MB/s for R5. Too good!


----------



## uri.raz (Mar 8, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Except the cloud based storage itself wasn't really hacked. The hackers got the victims to voluntarily give them their account information by sending emails to the victims posing as "Apple Security".



Except it doesn't matter. Photographers are as susceptible to social engineering as celebrities.


----------



## uri.raz (Mar 8, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> 'Ya got a link to where I can order a 45MP 1D X Mark III?



No. So?


----------



## AlanF (Mar 8, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> Except it doesn't matter. Photographers are as susceptible to social engineering as celebrities.


Speak for yourself.


----------



## uri.raz (Mar 8, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Speak for yourself.



I know enough photographers to know social engineering would work on some of them.

You've already taken it personally, so feel free to continue doing so.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 8, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> I stand corrected. So.. at least 180MB/s for R5. Too good!


That is actually TBD. The tests I did on the M6 II maxed out at 117 MB/sec after it was filled. So, it gets down to what Canon does with the R5, do they put in the hardware from the "R" that can do 182 MB/sec, or, considering this is a secondary card slot on the R5, do they put in the hardware from the M6 II.


----------



## AlanF (Mar 8, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> I know enough photographers to know social engineering would work on some of them.
> 
> You've already taken it personally, so feel free to continue doing so.


I haven't taken it personally - you are now jumping to conclusions about me as you have about others. You made a general sweeping statement about photographers, which you have now modified to some.


----------



## BillB (Mar 8, 2020)

Will there be a use case for still photography where the SD slot for the R5 will not be fast enough to keep up? If backup is not needed, the CFE should be fast enough for anything.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 8, 2020)

BillB said:


> Will there be a use case for still photography where the SD slot for the R5 will not be fast enough to keep up? If backup is not needed, the CFE should be fast enough for anything.



I can only see it being used as a backup. The SD cards are far too expensive to use as a main card vs CFE.


----------



## brad-man (Mar 8, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I can only see it being used as a backup. The SD cards are far too expensive to use as a main card vs CFE.


Not sure what you mean. At B&H, SanDisk Ext Pro CFExpress cards are $60 more than UHS-II cards for 64GB & 128GB sized cards.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 8, 2020)

26 pages about the media cards.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 8, 2020)

brad-man said:


> Not sure what you mean. At B&H, SanDisk Ext Pro CFExpress cards are $60 more than UHS-II cards for 64GB & 128GB sized cards.




Sandisk CF Express Extreme Pro 128GB 1700MB/s Read Speed, 1200MB/s Write Speed @ £299.99
Sandisk 128GB Extreme Pro SDHC Card 300MB/s Read Speed, 260MB/s Write Speed @ £265.00 reduced from £325.99

SDII cards are really slow compared to CFE and exceptionally expensive for what you get. We still have SD Express to come which will bring SD cards back into relevance. Just now buying a SD card is a poor investment given it is due replacement and the current cards are a stopgap.


----------



## scyrene (Mar 8, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> If cost were a concern then you cannot afford the R5 and the lenses to go with it.
> I know they will make it work as usual, just do not like having to use two different format means of storage.



This is rather off topic, but I've never understood the attitude - if you can afford X, you must be able to afford Y and Z on top. I'd think most people have a finite budget - and tradeoffs are made in different ways.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 8, 2020)

scyrene said:


> This is rather off topic, but I've never understood the attitude - if you can afford X, you must be able to afford Y and Z on top. I'd think most people have a finite budget - and tradeoffs are made in different ways.



I agree with this but also see the other side. On a more practical point; if you can afford the SD card, you can afford the CFE card.


----------



## brad-man (Mar 8, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I agree with this but also see the other side. On a more practical point; if you can afford the SD card, you can afford the CFE card.


Both sides have merit. The problem with 2 CFEx slots is folks would need to buy a minimum of 2 cards, probably 3, and then buy a reader. That's at least $300-450 for cards and another $60 for the reader (assuming SanDisk Ex Pro).
With 1 card of each, you can get away with 1 CFEx card and a reader. I suspect the majority of people will not need the full speed of CFEx most of the time. To be clear, in USA, SD UHS-II cards are $60 less than the same size CFEx cards, and are backwards compatible with UHS-I.
The only way to please (almost) everyone would be to have 2 CFEx slots and 1 SD UHS-II slot. That's extremely unlikely.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 9, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> Except it doesn't matter. Photographers are as susceptible to social engineering as celebrities.



The fact remains, though, that iCloud was not hacked. The iCLoud accounts of gullible individuals who gave away account info when they should have known better, were.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 9, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> No. So?



So if I'm looking for a 45 MP camera with dual CFExpress cards then your suggestion to get a 1D X Mark III is invalid.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 9, 2020)

BillB said:


> Will there be a use case for still photography where the SD slot for the R5 will not be fast enough to keep up? If backup is not needed, the CFE should be fast enough for anything.



A faster card bus with an appropriately fast enough card to exploit the bus speed will allow longer bursts before the camera bogs down. This is not an issue with JPEGs, as most of Canon's latest top tier cameras can burst indefinitely when only writing JPEGs to the memory card. Ultimately battery and card capacity are the limiting factors. With raw files it's a different story. The 1D X Mark III is the first Canon EOS camera (or any other FF format ILC of which I'm aware) that can burst indefinitely while saving raw files. But it is only 20 MP instead of 40-45 MP. Based on the fastest speeds at which other Canon cameras with UHS-II card slots can write to the fastest UHS-II memory cards, UHS-II will not be able to keep up indefinitely with 40-45 MP at 12 fps.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 9, 2020)

docsmith said:


> That is actually TBD. The tests I did on the M6 II maxed out at 117 MB/sec after it was filled. So, it gets down to what Canon does with the R5, do they put in the hardware from the "R" that can do 182 MB/sec, or, considering this is a secondary card slot on the R5, do they put in the hardware from the M6 II.



Not all UHS-II cards will allow the EOS R to write that fast to them. Only the fastest cards tested wrote that fast, though there were more than a few in the 175-180 MB/s range. There were also more than a few UHS-II cards that could do no better than 75-105 MB/s.






Canon EOS R Fastest SD Cards UHS-II vs UHS-I comparison of Write Speed in the EOS R Mirrorless Digital Camera - Camera Memory Speed Comparison & Performance tests for SD and CF cards


Canon EOS R SD card speed comparison. Recommended memory cards for the fullframe mirrorless digital camera for fast continuous shooting. Which Secure Digital memory cards to buy for the EOS-R.




www.cameramemoryspeed.com





What specific card were you using in your test of the M6 Mark II?


----------



## Architect1776 (Mar 9, 2020)

scyrene said:


> This is rather off topic, but I've never understood the attitude - if you can afford X, you must be able to afford Y and Z on top. I'd think most people have a finite budget - and tradeoffs are made in different ways.



True, but as a percent of the cost the difference is minuscule. Also how many use a credit card to purchase and make payments? Thus that minuscule difference might be $.01 a month.


----------



## slclick (Mar 9, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Calm down, dude. Overwrought are the people having continuous (post after post) hissy fits over something they already know isn't happening. Nothing wrong with wanting two matching slots. There is plenty wrong with continuously griping over something that IS NOT HAPPENING ALREADY. Children. Now please, carry on with your next 50 overwrought nightly posts.
> 
> BTW: I never said that any post that doesn't agree with my own is overwrought... that happens to be your own characterization. Project much?
> 
> Also, I too would prefer matching cards... BUT IT AIN'T HAPPENING. No sense crying over spilled milk.


You rock, you tell MC how it is.


----------



## slclick (Mar 9, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> I know enough photographers to know social engineering would work on some of them.
> 
> You've already taken it personally, so feel free to continue doing so.


This is tied for the dumbest thing said on CR ever.


----------



## slclick (Mar 9, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> 26 pages about the media cards.


F*cktards


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 9, 2020)

slclick said:


> F*cktards


Have you got into the great peanut butter debate yet?


----------



## brad-man (Mar 9, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Have you got into the great peanut butter debate yet?


There's no debate. Choosy mothers choose Jiff. I'm a choosy mother...


----------



## joestopper (Mar 9, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> 26 pages about the media cards.



No real news. That's why.
I assume the next "news" here on CR will be sth like: "R5 most likely to have 40-45MP".
And dont be surprised if this will fill another 26+ pages ...


----------



## slclick (Mar 9, 2020)

brad-man said:


> There's no debate. Choosy mothers choose Jiff. I'm a choosy mother...


There are quite a few 'mothers' here that's for sure.


----------



## slclick (Mar 9, 2020)

joestopper said:


> No real news. That's why.
> I assume the next "news" here on CR will be sth like: "R5 most likely to have 40-45MP".
> And dont be surprised if this will fill another 26+ pages ...


It's 45 and we're done. Now, will there be a power killing switch on the battery door? That's a point of contention.


----------



## Rule556 (Mar 9, 2020)

brad-man said:


> There's no debate. Choosy mothers choose Jiff. I'm a choosy mother...



Skippy or bust.


----------



## slclick (Mar 9, 2020)

Rule556 said:


> Skippy or bust.


Y'all like your sugar and oil your peanuts it seems it seems


----------



## uri.raz (Mar 9, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> The fact remains, though, that iCloud was not hacked. The iCLoud accounts of gullible individuals who gave away account info when they should have known better, were.



IMHO, social engineering is a form of hacking. Not all photographers are tech savvy, in this sense, hence my criticism of cloud usage.


----------



## uri.raz (Mar 9, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> So if I'm looking for a 45 MP camera with dual CFExpress cards then your suggestion to get a 1D X Mark III is invalid.



Feel free to ask camera manufacturers to make such a camera. I'm sure (really, with no shred of cynicism) they'll make one in a few years.


----------



## scyrene (Mar 9, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I agree with this but also see the other side. On a more practical point; if you can afford the SD card, you can afford the CFE card.



I can only speak for myself (though I'd expect this is not uncommon), but I have SD cards already. If I bought a new camera, and was pushing the budget, I'd use those until I could justify the purchase of the new kind. If the difference in performance is as massive as some are describing here, that would likely be a priority, but I'd hold off as long as possible to even out my expenditure.



Architect1776 said:


> True, but as a percent of the cost the difference is minuscule. Also how many use a credit card to purchase and make payments? Thus that minuscule difference might be $.01 a month.



You're not wrong, although to some of us, every penny counts 

As a general point here, I get that some people want the best of everything, but that's rarely if ever the case. Admittedly I'm much more laid back because I almost never shoot with two cards in at once, and have no strong feelings about different formats (I'm not a high fps type), though I did invest in a higher-speed and -resolution CF card after getting the 5Ds. I'm sure Canon's reasoning in offering mixed card slots is based on experience and feedback, anyhow.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 9, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Not all UHS-II cards will allow the EOS R to write that fast to them. Only the fastest cards tested wrote that fast, though there were more than a few in the 175-180 MB/s range. There were also more than a few UHS-II cards that could do no better than 75-105 MB/s.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Very true. These are all "up to" type of numbers and it is impressive the variety you see with different cards.

As for what I tested in the M6 II, it was a Sandisk Extreme Pro 32 GB, 300 MB/sec, UHS II (SDHC II) card.
I actually picked it off the list from cameramemoryspeed, rated at 174 MB/sec on the EOS-R, plus the UHS-I memory cards I was comparing it too were both Sandisk Extreme Pros.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 9, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I can only speak for myself (though I'd expect this is not uncommon), but I have SD cards already. If I bought a new camera, and was pushing the budget, I'd use those until I could justify the purchase of the new kind. If the difference in performance is as massive as some are describing here, that would likely be a priority, but I'd hold off as long as possible to even out my expenditure.



I have CFE and CF cards, and would expect any 5D owner would have a number of CF cards as the SD slot on the 3 and 4 is only worthwhile as a backup and the 5D and 5DII where CF only. I do not own a single SD card, they tend to be in consumer models like the xxxD series and point and shoots so other than way back when I had my 550D, I have never owned one.


----------



## koenkooi (Mar 9, 2020)

scyrene said:


> I can only speak for myself (though I'd expect this is not uncommon), but I have SD cards already. If I bought a new camera, and was pushing the budget, I'd use those until I could justify the purchase of the new kind. If the difference in performance is as massive as some are describing here, that would likely be a priority, but I'd hold off as long as possible to even out my expenditure.
> [..]


I'm going to budget for camera + €1000 so when it's released and I have saved enough I can buy the camera, grip, matching card(s) and extra batteries. That does move the purchase out a considerable time, but it's not like my current setups magically stops working when R5 preorders open


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 9, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> I'm going to budget for camera + €1000 so when it's released and I have saved enough I can buy the camera, grip, matching card(s) and extra batteries. That does move the purchase out a considerable time, but it's not like my current setups magically stops working when R5 preorders open



You could start buying CFE cards now, I have a small collection(though I do have a body to put on them). I know they'll drop in price a lot with them being the main media for Nikon and Canon going forward, but I also fear they'll be a sudden jump in demand for them soon.


----------



## bergstrom (Mar 9, 2020)

correct me if I'm wrong, but one complaint about mirrorless is that the sensor is exposed while not in use , and the eos r didn't have asensor protector or lock up, built in, while other manufacturers did have one. so i'm hoping this R5 DOES have something like that.


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 9, 2020)

bergstrom said:


> correct me if I'm wrong, but one complaint about mirrorless is that the sensor is exposed while not in use , and the eos r didn't have asensor protector or lock up, built in, while other manufacturers did have one. so i'm hoping this R5 DOES have something like that.



Quite opposite. One of the most acclaimed Canon EOS features is: shutter close when changing lenses. I would imagine that R5 has been designed the same way


----------



## cayenne (Mar 9, 2020)

scyrene said:


> This is rather off topic, but I've never understood the attitude - if you can afford X, you must be able to afford Y and Z on top. I'd think most people have a finite budget - and tradeoffs are made in different ways.



Well, I can think of it this way.

Somethings in this world are, for whatever reasons...expensive.

And you have to consider the TOTAL cost of ownership and maintenance for such purchases.....the initial cost of the item is only the beginning quite often.

Think if you buy a Porsche, or even better...a Lambo.

Sure you might can save and work and buy one of those cars...BUT, you have to consider that that is ONLY the beginning.

If you buy new, once those suckers go out of warranty....and you need to take it in for maintenance or repair....it gets $$$$$$$ very quickly.

You drive into a Porsche shop, and you basically lay $1K on the counter just for driving in and then you start adding to that once they start poking around on it.

So, that's kind of the thought I guess with folks' comments on the coming R5. Once you get to that league of camera, you have to plan to be able to 'feed' the thing too with memory cards, and lenses that do it justice....etc.

So, it isn't just the initial purchase you have to consider when buying items of this level or higher.

Like. with a Porsche....sure, you may can afford to buy it....but, can you also afford to *drive* it?

Hope that helps, I always love a good car analogy.


C


----------



## cayenne (Mar 9, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Have you got into the great peanut butter debate yet?




Crunchy or Smooth? THAT's the big question....I vote Extra Crunchy!!


----------



## scyrene (Mar 9, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I have CFE and CF cards, and would expect any 5D owner would have a number of CF cards as the SD slot on the 3 and 4 is only worthwhile as a backup and the 5D and 5DII where CF only. I do not own a single SD card, they tend to be in consumer models like the xxxD series and point and shoots so other than way back when I had my 550D, I have never owned one.



Fair enough.


cayenne said:


> Well, I can think of it this way.
> 
> Somethings in this world are, for whatever reasons...expensive.
> 
> ...



Car analogies are a bit outside of my sphere, I'm sure your points have validity. However, I'm not sure what the car parallel with memory cards would be - as I say, many people have legacy cards. Of course, eventually new types are brought in, so there's always a time when you have to stump up for new ones. But as I say, if I have just enough budget for a new body, but not new cards, knowing I can use my existing ones - even at a speed penalty - would be a bonus, and would encourage me to get that body sooner than if I knew I had to budget for all new memory cards (and card reader) too. I'm inclined to believe Canon's decision to have different memory card types in some bodies is for that reason, and/or for broader compatibility, rather than primarily as a cost-saving measure (but we can't know either way).


----------



## bergstrom (Mar 9, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Quite opposite. One of the most acclaimed Canon EOS features is: shutter close when changing lenses. I would imagine that R5 has been designed the same way




ah ok thanks, i thought it was something absent from eos r, or maybe it was rp that didn't have it?


----------



## AlanF (Mar 9, 2020)

bergstrom said:


> correct me if I'm wrong, but one complaint about mirrorless is that the sensor is exposed while not in use , and the eos r didn't have asensor protector or lock up, built in, while other manufacturers did have one. so i'm hoping this R5 DOES have something like that.


Correct me if I am wrong as well. But, I seem to recall it's the other way around, a nice feature of the R is that it does have a sensor protector, unlike the other manufacturers,


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Mar 9, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Correct me if I am wrong as well. But, I seem to recall it's the other way around, a nice feature of the R is that it does have a sensor protector, unlike the other manufacturers,



The R has the shutter come down on the sensor when you remove the lens. This is the only camera I know that does this. The feature is not included in the RP.



https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/canon-eos-r-vs-sony-a7iii-product-31-1-1024x576.jpg


----------



## Kit. (Mar 9, 2020)

cayenne said:


> You drive into a Porsche shop, and you basically lay $1K on the counter just for driving in and then you start adding to that once they start poking around on it.
> 
> So, that's kind of the thought I guess with folks' comments on the coming R5.


Oh, they probably think of a Hasselblad.


----------



## Rule556 (Mar 9, 2020)

slclick said:


> Y'all like your sugar and oil your peanuts it seems it seems



Yes sir. My dad spent the 70's and 80's feeding us that Adam's no fun peanut butter. I'M FREE NOW!!!


----------



## bergstrom (Mar 10, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> The R has the shutter come down on the sensor when you remove the lens. This is the only camera I know that does this. The feature is not included in the RP.
> 
> 
> 
> https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/canon-eos-r-vs-sony-a7iii-product-31-1-1024x576.jpg




ah ok, its prob the RP that the article was on about., Thanks.


----------



## tpatana (Mar 10, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> True, but as a percent of the cost the difference is minuscule. Also how many use a credit card to purchase and make payments? Thus that minuscule difference might be $.01 a month.



Duh?

I'm assuming if you buy 2x CFE cards, it'll be around $500 or so. If you are making payments over 12 months, that's ~$40 a month (plus interest).

If that's minuscule to you, I can PM you my paypal and you can send me $40 a month for next 12 months.


----------



## slclick (Mar 10, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Duh?
> 
> I'm assuming if you buy 2x CFE cards, it'll be around $500 or so. If you are making payments over 12 months, that's ~$40 a month (plus interest).
> 
> If that's minuscule to you, I can PM you my paypal and you can send me $40 a month for next 12 months.


I know! Turning it into a % was so unrealistic.


----------



## Architect1776 (Mar 10, 2020)

tpatana said:


> Duh?
> 
> I'm assuming if you buy 2x CFE cards, it'll be around $500 or so. If you are making payments over 12 months, that's ~$40 a month (plus interest).
> 
> If that's minuscule to you, I can PM you my paypal and you can send me $40 a month for next 12 months.



Buy a cheaper one. There are ones less than 250.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Mar 10, 2020)

canonnews said:


> no one does these in MB/sec transfer rates. it's always mbps ..
> what's to match on panasonic? they don't have 8K. Expect the codec to be h.265 anyways looking at the 1DX Mark III that seems to be what they will do for the 8K.


I used MBps unit because the person I was quoting was measuring in MBps. I just converted the bitrates to MB. It's the exact same amount of data if it was in megabits, just converted to megabytes for the conversation.

The comparison to Panasonic in terms of codec efficiency for 8K is what it'd look like with their current codec efficiency for 4k. If using the same codec settings, the data rate for 8K would come out to 4 times as much as 4K.

H.265 8K would be impressive, if they can get there. The processing power and heat factor would be high, unless if they finally picked up some modern processors.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 12, 2020)

docsmith said:


> Very true. These are all "up to" type of numbers and it is impressive the variety you see with different cards.
> 
> As for what I tested in the M6 II, it was a Sandisk Extreme Pro 32 GB, 300 MB/sec, UHS II (SDHC II) card.
> I actually picked it off the list from cameramemoryspeed, rated at 174 MB/sec on the EOS-R, plus the UHS-I memory cards I was comparing it too were both Sandisk Extreme Pros.




Another thing one must consider when buying Sandisk is the distribution channel one buys through. Sandisk is probably the most counterfeited brand of memory cards on the planet. I've read suggestions that there are probably more fake Sandisk cards than real ones in existence. YMMV.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 12, 2020)

brad-man said:


> There's no debate. Choosy mothers choose Jiff. I'm a choosy mother...



Jif. JIF. Choosy mothers choose Jif.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 12, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Another thing one must consider when buying Sandisk is the distribution channel one buys through. Sandisk is probably the most counterfeited brand of memory cards on the planet. I've read suggestions that there are probably more fake Sandisk cards than real ones in existence. YMMV.


I hadn't thought of that and it would explain the difference compared tot he EOS-R.

Sandisk let me register the card using the serial number on the back and show it to be "under warranty." So I am assuming this is a legitimate card.


----------



## MrToes (Mar 13, 2020)

navastronia said:


> Wait for the R1, then.
> 
> No offense to Mr. Toes, or any other poster, but this thread is bananas. I can't imagine a _less_ controversial Canon decision than this; every 5D since the mark II has had mismatched slots. It's a feature of the line by now. Deal with it, or buy something else.



No offense to the Bananas replier, but getting up with the times is not a odd request. If your happy with your slow work flow then go shoot with a dinosaur.


----------



## SecureGSM (Mar 13, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> Another thing one must consider when buying Sandisk is the distribution channel one buys through. Sandisk is probably the most counterfeited brand of memory cards on the planet. I've read suggestions that there are probably more fake Sandisk cards than real ones in existence. YMMV.


I confirm that. I sourced a Sandisk high capacity card recently via an authorised Sandisk distributor. The card has failed within literary hours of use. Upon a rigorous investigation, it turns out that I was sold a counterfeit product. Refunded with apologies. with no explanation Provided as to how this even a possibility for a product sourced via an authorised supply chain. I made some calls
And apparently there are number of offical
And “unofficial” supply chains that they are connected to. It is becoming really convoluted lately. I am going to Source Sandisk product directly from the top level distributor in the country.


----------



## navastronia (Mar 13, 2020)

MrToes said:


> No offense to the Bananas replier, but getting up with the times is not a odd request. If your happy with your slow work flow then go shoot with a dinosaur.



and here I was, thinking the "Best camera is the one given to you to shoot with"


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 13, 2020)

docsmith said:


> I hadn't thought of that and it would explain the difference compared tot he EOS-R.
> 
> Sandisk let me register the card using the serial number on the back and show it to be "under warranty." So I am assuming this is a legitimate card.



Beyond that, even genuine SanDisk (or other "top" brands) cards can have a bad chip in them. Different batches of the same cards have different lot numbers and the chips inside them can be sourced from different chip makers. Back when Rob Galbreath was doing the same thing as Camera Memory Speed does now, he even included the lot numbers off each card he tested in the information he posted.

There are only about seven actual makers of flash memory chips small enough to fit in SD cards (and other similar memory cards). Everyone buys from all of them. The top brands get the highest graded chips (based on QC measurements of each production run at the actual chip foundry), then the mid-level and lower brands get the leftovers and the counterfeiters buy the rejects. Almost all chips have bad sectors, but they are made with reserve capacity so that the bad sectors can be blocked from use. The more bad sectors chips in a run have, the lower their grade and the less reserve they have. 

Poorly written controllers can also affect card performance.


----------



## Michael Clark (Mar 13, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> I confirm that. I sourced a Sandisk high capacity card recently via an authorised Sandisk distributor. The card has failed within literary hours of use. Upon a rigorous investigation, it turns out that I was sold a counterfeit product. Refunded with apologies. with no explanation Provided as to how this even a possibility for a product sourced via an authorised supply chain. I made some calls
> And apparently there are number of offical
> And “unofficial” supply chains that they are connected to. It is becoming really convoluted lately. I am going to Source Sandisk product directly from the top level distributor in the country.



I recently got a B+W polarizer through amazon that was about as genuine as a three dollar bill. I sent in back and bought a real B+W polarizer from B&H.

The kicker? I like the look of the shots I got with the fake filter better than the shots I've gotten with the genuine article!


----------

