# Canon will reclaim their full-frame megapixel crown [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 31, 2019)

> After Sony announced the A7R IV, Canon lost its full-frame sensor megapixel count crown. The new Sony comes in at 61mp, eclipsing Canon’s EOS 5DS & EOS 5DS R duo, which have a 50.6mp full-frame sensor.
> It has been rumored in the past that Canon will eclipse 70mp with their EOS 5DS  replacement and that it will come to the EOS R system and not the EOS DSLRs. So that means no DSLR replacement for the EOS 5DS and EOS 5DS R.
> We were told recently that Canon will indeed “return to the top of the megapixel count for full-frame sensors” with the release of the EOS RS (we’re guessing on the name).
> There have been two sensors tested in the new EOS R body, and it’s possible that the camera may come with a sensor over 80mp. The source noted that Canon is about to release brand new advancements in sensor technology and has “caught up to Sony”. What that means is unknown at this time.
> The source did say that Canon will be “getting into the spec wars”...



Continue reading...


----------



## JoFT (Jul 31, 2019)

Wow!! this sounds like music in my ears....

Looking at the lenses Canon is releasing for the R-mounts this makes totally sense. I predict all the guys changing to Sony in these days will have regrets in the future.....


----------



## Woody (Jul 31, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> The source noted that Canon is about to release brand new advancements in sensor technology and has “caught up to Sony”. What that means is unknown at this time.



The new sensor technology part sounds consistent with what Thom Hogan reported:
"Meanwhile, Canon supposedly is hard at work on a complete redo of their sensor lineup, but we’ve yet to see what that means. The M, R, and RP use older DSLR sensors; Canon’s next technology doesn’t yet exist in a camera, though I’m pretty sure it’s still progressing for deployment soon."
- http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews...mber-2019-mirrorl/the-full-frame-game-is.html

Curious what this means...


----------



## AlanF (Jul 31, 2019)

I thought we all despised spec wars?


----------



## 12Broncos (Jul 31, 2019)

JoFT said:


> Wow!! this sounds like music in my ears....
> 
> Looking at the lenses Canon is releasing for the R-mounts this makes totally sense. I predict all the guys changing to Sony in these days will have regrets in the future.....


Which is why I'm very glad I didn't jump on Sony's ship and sail away to point of no return. Now there's something I'm wondering about. There is a post on Canonwatch.com stating that Canon lenses have a MP limit. Which personally Idk if they do, my guess is no they don't. The new RF lenses coming out I believe should be capable of handling any number of MP.


----------



## hendrik-sg (Jul 31, 2019)

This might mean, that the "next generation" Canon sensor may catch up with the somy sensors from 2011, which by the way should have been in the 5d Mark iii. 
It can easily be, that they mean the pixel count only, payed by a slower readout and even less dynamic range for the benefit of relatively more dead space between the pixels.

the R-lenses may be fantastic but system efficency is a product of lens and sensor efficency, which means that the weaker Canon sensors easily waste the advantage which would be possible with the better Sony sensors

Fantastic times are ahead of us


----------



## Adelino (Jul 31, 2019)

12Broncos said:


> Which is why I'm very glad I didn't jump on Sony's ship and sail away to point of no return. Now there's something I'm wondering about. There is a post on Canonwatch.com stating that Canon lenses have a MP limit. Which personally Idk if they do, my guess is no they don't. The new RF lenses coming out I believe should be capable of handling any number of MP.


Of course any lens would have some kind if resolving limit.


----------



## 12Broncos (Jul 31, 2019)

Adelino said:


> Of course any lens would have some kind if resolving limit.


My guess was wrong, I learned something. It's obvious though that if Canon is coming out with a MP beast, the lenses for that beast will be able to handle it.


----------



## CanoKnight (Jul 31, 2019)

"80MP".

Thank goodness Canon execs have finally realized what's been holding them back behind their rivals - the lack of an eighty megapixel camera.


----------



## BillB (Jul 31, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I thought we all despised spec wars?


Don't worry. Sony fanboys will always be able to come up with magic numbers for us to despise.


----------



## arbitrage (Jul 31, 2019)

As a bird/wildlife shooter, I'm always after high MP FF cameras that allow a healthy crop when needed. But I'm worried Canon won't be able to back those 70-80MPs with 10FPS full AE/AF as Sony does with the A7R4 or what Nikon does with the 9FPS (via grip) D850. The 5DSR was a nice camera and I owned it for a while but with 5FPS (dropping to 3 as the battery life dwindled) and so so AF it never could meet all my needs as a fully fleshed bird in flight camera.

Of course for other type of photography like landscapes and products etc the camera will do just fine.


----------



## masterpix (Jul 31, 2019)

"Caught up with sony" can mean: 1) higher dynamic range 2 )higher low light sensitivity (cmbined with higher dynamic range means even better night shots) and 3) lower noise. I hppe this comes to the new 7D/9D/90D and the 1Dx too.


----------



## djack41 (Jul 31, 2019)

Advancement in AF, dynamic range and noise is more important than MP count.


----------



## amorse (Jul 31, 2019)

Well, I guess this is all in line with what we just heard about the M6 - I wonder if it was the same source? 

I'm fine if they want to get into the spec war, but my biggest concern is cost. Canon isn't exactly known for having very economically priced flagships, and if they're dumping features into the new top of the line cameras, I will assume they'll come with top of the line prices as well. I wonder if we'll see prices beyond inflation-adjusted common prices for 5D series equivalent or 1D series equivalent cameras? I guess time will tell!


----------



## masterpix (Jul 31, 2019)

arbitrage said:


> As a bird/wildlife shooter, I'm always after high MP FF cameras that allow a healthy crop when needed. But I'm worried Canon won't be able to back those 70-80MPs with 10FPS full AE/AF as Sony does with the A7R4 or what Nikon does with the 9FPS (via grip) D850. The 5DSR was a nice camera and I owned it for a while but with 5FPS (dropping to 3 as the battery life dwindled) and so so AF it never could meet all my needs as a fully fleshed bird in flight camera.
> 
> Of course for other type of photography like landscapes and products etc the camera will do just fine.


30MP for 2/3 sensor means about 77MP on FF similar sensor. Just as the 20.2MP in the 7D2 was 50MP on the 5Ds


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 31, 2019)

amorse said:


> Well, I guess this is all in line with what we just heard about the M6 - I wonder if it was the same source?
> 
> I'm fine if they want to get into the spec war, but my biggest concern is cost. Canon isn't exactly known for having very economically priced flagships, and if they're dumping features into the new top of the line cameras, I will assume they'll come with top of the line prices as well. I wonder if we'll see prices beyond inflation-adjusted common prices for 5D series equivalent or 1D series equivalent cameras? I guess time will tell!



I’m not disputing the point merely asking, but surely for that market the purchasers are either buying as self empoloyed/businesses and writing the value down or are comparatively wealthy amateurs who don’t really care about the cost?

Or put another way, isn’t the pricing in this bracket not as sensitive as other cameras particularly entry level models.


----------



## Uneternal (Jul 31, 2019)

Maybe - just maybe Canon finally noticed they can use their dual pixel sensor design to more than just focussing. The technology theoretically allows Dual-ISO, a thing Magic Lantern made popular, gaining the dynamic range to Nikon levels - although complicated to use.
And also could be used to add depth data to a picture, and we know from smartphones what cool things you can do with that: Relighting a photo or changing the virtual aperture.
IMO the internet would go crazy if a Canon camera had these options.


----------



## transpo1 (Jul 31, 2019)

Well, I hope they also be "getting into the [[ video ]] spec wars" as well; that would really be music to the internet's ears. I might actually buy my first Canon body since the 5DIII to go with all my Canon lenses, currently only used on RED.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 31, 2019)

arbitrage said:


> As a bird/wildlife shooter, I'm always after high MP FF cameras that allow a healthy crop when needed. But I'm worried Canon won't be able to back those 70-80MPs with 10FPS full AE/AF as Sony does with the A7R4 or what Nikon does with the 9FPS (via grip) D850. The 5DSR was a nice camera and I owned it for a while but with 5FPS (dropping to 3 as the battery life dwindled) and so so AF it never could meet all my needs as a fully fleshed bird in flight camera.
> 
> Of course for other type of photography like landscapes and products etc the camera will do just fine.


Good to see you back here! Do you think the A7R4 will wean you off your A9 for your requirements for BIF? The R3 wasn't up to it.


----------



## slclick (Jul 31, 2019)

No matter if the MP spec gets anywhere close, the new Rx will have a menu system, ergonomics and lens compatibility we all know to be the finest available so if they get the other things which folks are up in arms about, noise, clean base iso, fps,DR, etc then it will be the beast you have all been waiting for.


----------



## JoeDavid (Jul 31, 2019)

I am considering the new Sony and a Metabones EF adapter as a higher MP landscape option. I like my Canon R and would love a high MP body for the RF lenses but, with no announcement in sight, how long do you wait? Plus Canon usually “under-preforms” compared to the initial rumors. I will say that the real world RAW files from the R are quite good (similar to the 5DM4 of course). Canon has moved so slowly with sensor tech improvements in the past it is hard to believe that they would make the leap all the way to a FF backside illuminated 80MP sensor. It could be incredible but I’ll believe it when I see it!


----------



## mpb001 (Jul 31, 2019)

This is why I don’t just jump ship between brands. The industry is constantly evolving. The other reason for me is I like Canon ergonomics, colors and my workflow is down pretty well.


----------



## BillB (Jul 31, 2019)

JoeDavid said:


> I am considering the new Sony and a Metabones EF adapter as a higher MP landscape option. I like my Canon R and would love a high MP body for the RF lenses but, with no announcement in sight, how long do you wait? Plus Canon usually “under-preforms” compared to the initial rumors. I will say that the real world RAW files from the R are quite good (similar to the 5DM4 of course). Canon has moved so slowly with sensor tech improvements in the past it is hard to believe that they would make the leap all the way to a FF backside illuminated 80MP sensor. It could be incredible but I’ll believe it when I see it!


Hopefully, Canon made a strategic decision a while ago to take the time to make a major jump is sensor and processor performance rather than going with a more incremental approach. We shall see.


----------



## BillB (Jul 31, 2019)

JoeDavid said:


> I am considering the new Sony and a Metabones EF adapter as a higher MP landscape option. I like my Canon R and would love a high MP body for the RF lenses but, with no announcement in sight, how long do you wait? Plus Canon usually “under-preforms” compared to the initial rumors. I will say that the real world RAW files from the R are quite good (similar to the 5DM4 of course). Canon has moved so slowly with sensor tech improvements in the past it is hard to believe that they would make the leap all the way to a FF backside illuminated 80MP sensor. It could be incredible but I’ll believe it when I see it!


Well, if the rumors are right, we will know fairly quickly when the new aps-c camera is released.


----------



## Jones (Jul 31, 2019)

Still four weeks until christmas...


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jul 31, 2019)

Owning the 5DS, 50 mpx is plenty already, but the 5DS / 5DSR at least offer S-RAW and M-RAW which is great. Sony's new A7R iv presently will imprison users to only L-RAW or full size. That would suck. If Canon boosts the resolution, fine for me, provided the RAW can be set to several size options.


----------



## peters (Jul 31, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> "80MP".
> 
> Thank goodness Canon execs have finally realized what's been holding them back behind their rivals - the lack of an eighty megapixel camera.


I honesty look for a model like this and the 61mpixel of the Sony A7R IV could be reason to try this camera. 
Its a VERY nice thing to have for high quality product photography. Its also very nice for weddings where you can recompose shots easier.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Jul 31, 2019)

If the 7D Mark II and 5DSR relationship are any indication of how Canon intends to create a high-resolution sensor based on the APS-C model, we can expect an 80mp sensor from Canon....that is presuming the the rumored 32mp resolution of the M5/M6 Mark II's is truthful.


----------



## amorse (Jul 31, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I’m not disputing the point merely asking, but surely for that market the purchasers are either buying as self empoloyed/businesses and writing the value down or are comparatively wealthy amateurs who don’t really care about the cost?
> 
> Or put another way, isn’t the pricing in this bracket not as sensitive as other cameras particularly entry level models.


Oh I completely agree - the market for that camera will find a way to make it work. I wasn't commenting on my concern for Canon's ability to peg market price tolerance, I was more commenting on my own cheapness and selfish desire to be able to afford the camera within reason


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jul 31, 2019)

Uneternal said:


> Canon finally noticed they can use their dual pixel sensor design to more than just focussing. The technology theoretically allows Dual-ISO,



Maybe. Is it known that subpixels have individually variable gain?

The current DCRAW files can extract additional range because one is brighter than the other, but seemingly this refers to something not already there.

Canon might go forward and make it readily accessible rather than requiring marginally stable freeware, but that’s not a sensor implementation

I’d guess thom’s post is has something to do with either QPAF or rotating each adjacent pixel pair 90 degrees to facilitate phase detection in both axes.


----------



## james75 (Jul 31, 2019)

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said:


> Owning the 5DS, 50 mpx is plenty already, but the 5DS / 5DSR at least offer S-RAW and M-RAW which is great. Sony's new A7R iv presently will imprison users to only L-RAW or full size. That would suck. If Canon boosts the resolution, fine for me, provided the RAW can be set to several size options.



Yeah hopefully there will be that option. I'm excited to see what becomes of this camera, but I'm waiting on the next version of the eosr, which will have the new sensor tech and be closer to about 40 megapixels.


----------



## Besisika (Jul 31, 2019)

mpb001 said:


> This is why I don’t just jump ship between brands. The industry is constantly evolving. The other reason for me is I like Canon ergonomics, colors and my workflow is down pretty well.


That has been my attitude for the last 27 years. However, I am on a verge of changing it. I will give them one more last chance.
My eyes already rotated toward the GFX 100, despite the price tag. This beast is targeting the so far untouchable Canon ,Nikon and Hasselblad higher end photographers; the ones convinced that gear matters.

It is nice to have megapixels, which is what I am looking for, but if it is not associated with solid stabilization, it would be nothing more than a garbage. User error is of a highest priority and any gear better than anyone else in reducing that error will win the heart of the users. Sticking to lens stabilization, so that you could sell more higher end lenses is simply not user oriented strategy, it is your pocket strategy. Make the combination of in-body stabilization and lens stabilization very effective, better than any in the market, and these users will come to you.
At this stage of my photography, I am very picky. If you want to enter the market of this level of megapixel, you need to be very picky too. Whatever quality of sensor you can come up, you won't beat a bigger size used in the GFX. My opinion, stabilization is your door in.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 31, 2019)

BillB said:


> Hopefully, Canon made a strategic decision a while ago to take the time to make a major jump is sensor and processor performance rather than going with a more incremental approach. We shall see.


I'm always curious just what "major jump" people are expecting. When I look at the much-disputed DXO comparison graphs, there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Sony and Canon.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 31, 2019)

Besisika said:


> ...My eyes already rotated toward the GFX 100, despite the price tag. This beast is targeting the so far untouchable Canon ,Nikon and Hasselblad higher end photographers; the ones convinced that gear matters....
> 
> ...At this stage of my photography, I am very picky. If you want to enter the market of this level of megapixel, you need to be very picky too. Whatever quality of sensor you can come up, you won't beat a bigger size used in the GFX...



I'd like to know what you are photographing and how you are using those photographs that makes you so much more picky than others. The only thing I can think of is massive, billboard-sized prints that are displayed in locations where the viewers can actually walk right up and look at the images from a foot away. Are you Andreas Gursky?


----------



## Busted Knuckles (Jul 31, 2019)

Pixel density of the APC so matching up IBIS and LIS would be key to get the benefit. I noticed I had to step up my technique when I rented the 5DsR compared to the 5DIII. 
Wonder if having an AA filter even matters at that level (I guess it would based on the APC pixel size) 

Would likely be my "forever" camera. Hanging out w/ the current bodies hoping for just such a beast.


----------



## BillB (Jul 31, 2019)

arbitrage said:


> As a bird/wildlife shooter, I'm always after high MP FF cameras that allow a healthy crop when needed. But I'm worried Canon won't be able to back those 70-80MPs with 10FPS full AE/AF as Sony does with the A7R4 or what Nikon does with the 9FPS (via grip) D850. The 5DSR was a nice camera and I owned it for a while but with 5FPS (dropping to 3 as the battery life dwindled) and so so AF it never could meet all my needs as a fully fleshed bird in flight camera.
> 
> Of course for other type of photography like landscapes and products etc the camera will do just fine.


How about an aps-c camera with the 32 ish sensor, a lot of fps and an RF mount then?


----------



## BillB (Jul 31, 2019)

Besisika said:


> That has been my attitude for the last 27 years. However, I am on a verge of changing it. I will give them one more last chance.
> My eyes already rotated toward the GFX 100, despite the price tag. This beast is targeting the so far untouchable Canon ,Nikon and Hasselblad higher end photographers; the ones convinced that gear matters.
> 
> It is nice to have megapixels, which is what I am looking for, but if it is not associated with solid stabilization, it would be nothing more than a garbage. User error is of a highest priority and any gear better than anyone else in reducing that error will win the heart of the users. Sticking to lens stabilization, so that you could sell more higher end lenses is simply not user oriented strategy, it is your pocket strategy. Make the combination of in-body stabilization and lens stabilization very effective, better than any in the market, and these users will come to you.
> At this stage of my photography, I am very picky. If you want to enter the market of this level of megapixel, you need to be very picky too. Whatever quality of sensor you can come up, you won't beat a bigger size used in the GFX. My opinion, stabilization is your door in.


Hard to beat a tripod for solid stabilization.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 31, 2019)

12Broncos said:


> There is a post on Canonwatch.com stating that Canon lenses have a MP limit. Which personally Idk if they do, my guess is no they don't.



Component resolution does not 'cap' system resolution in the way many people imagine. The final resolution of an optical system is less than the weakest component. But improving *any* component brings the system closer to that theoretical limit.

Bob Atkins demonstrated this in his review of the 5Ds by finding the worst EF lens he could and shooting it on a 6D and a 5Ds. On the 6D the resulting image looked completely unusable, 'coke bottle' tier. On the 5Ds the image looked poor but maybe usable for small prints.

The combination of this new R sensor and much of the higher end Canon glass that is available, EF and RF, will be stunning.


----------



## tmroper (Jul 31, 2019)

Music to the ears of computer manufactures, too.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 31, 2019)

hendrik-sg said:


> the R-lenses may be fantastic but system efficency is a product of lens and sensor efficency, which means that the weaker Canon sensors easily waste the advantage which would be possible with the better Sony sensors



This is a ridiculous way to look at it since resolution impacts every image taken. Dynamic range does not. Very few scenes would fall perfectly within the DR difference between an older Canon sensor and the newest A7 sensors (as opposed to being completely within or completely outside of the DR of both). As it has been demonstrated repeatedly on this forum, even the people who cry about DR the most can't seem to post images showing they can take advantage of the difference between an A73/A74 and an original 7D, much less the tiny noise difference between an A73/A74 and a 5D4 or R.

For the vast majority of photographs there is no 'advantage wasted' even if one accepts that DR is the most important thing on Earth.


----------



## sdz (Jul 31, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I'm always curious just what "major jump" people are expecting. When I look at the much-disputed DXO comparison graphs, there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Sony and Canon.



A performance increase that enables Canon sensors to gain higher frame rates, uncropped 4K video, better Eye AF, while keeping DPAF, implementing QPAF, etc. Image quality is just one point of comparison. There are others.


----------



## preppyak (Jul 31, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I thought we all despised spec wars?


Not if the specs are in sensor tech where Canon has been well behind. Or in video specs, where canon has been well behind.

The difference in 12fps v 14fps...or 480 focus points v 571 focus points...yeah, those are silly spec wars. But it'd be a welcome change for Canon to put out their best in each camera versus crazy segmentation that pulls basic shit like 1080/24 out of a lesser camera.


----------



## preppyak (Jul 31, 2019)

sdz said:


> A performance increase that enables Canon sensors to gain higher frame rates, uncropped 4K video, better Eye AF, while keeping DPAF, implementing QPAF, etc. Image quality is just one point of comparison. There are others.


This. I think the issue is less with Canon sensors (though there is room for improvement there), and more with their processing. Though there is certainly a part of me that thinks a 5dIV could do 4k60 and Canon just segmented it out to protect their Cxxx lines.


----------



## Don Haines (Jul 31, 2019)

It will have more megapixels than Sony
It will have faster speeds than Sony
It will have more DR than Sony
It will beat Sony in every metric!

DXO will rate Sony higher...…..


----------



## sdz (Jul 31, 2019)

preppyak said:


> Not if the specs are in sensor tech where Canon has been well behind. Or in video specs, where canon has been well behind.
> 
> The difference in 12fps v 14fps...or 480 focus points v 571 focus points...yeah, those are silly spec wars. But it'd be a welcome change for Canon to put out their best in each camera versus crazy segmentation that pulls basic shit like 1080/24 out of a lesser camera.



Removing 1080/24 was an insult to Canon customers even if they had no use for it


----------



## Chaitanya (Jul 31, 2019)

Will have new sensor tech rumoured to come with 90D/M5 mk 2


----------



## ashmadux (Jul 31, 2019)

Who really cares? Not trying to be sarcastic. A slow, limited feature high megapixel body. A practical crop mode? Good luck.

This company is the meaning of struggle. If canon thinks that more megapixels is enough to keep them in the lead- with old tech moving all that data around- then they already lost. Canons lineup has no feet. The R doesn't even have a joystick for moving the focus point. At $2300. Is this crazy town or what.

Just like my beautiful 5d3, *I want a reliable, full feature set body without lame firmware compromises*. 60+ MP....interesting, but not critical.


----------



## Eersel (Jul 31, 2019)

What if I told you megapixels wasn't the most important spec of them all?


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jul 31, 2019)

james75 said:


> Yeah hopefully there will be that option. I'm excited to see what becomes of this camera, but I'm waiting on the next version of the eosr, which will have the new sensor tech and be closer to about 40 megapixels.



Wouldn't need to start with 40, if it can have 80 and the option for 40 also. I used my 5DS as a 2nd body for weddings alongside a 5D mk ii and just set the 5DS on a smaller setting.

Two separate bodies would be good too.

Meanwhile, I'm with you on the 40 megapixels. The EOS R I own right now has plenty. Aside from the two card thing, I could practically just get a 2nd one of those as a 3rd body.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 31, 2019)

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said:


> Owning the 5DS, 50 mpx is plenty already, but the 5DS / 5DSR at least offer S-RAW and M-RAW which is great. Sony's new A7R iv presently will imprison users to only L-RAW or full size. That would suck. If Canon boosts the resolution, fine for me, provided the RAW can be set to several size options.


 Pardon my ignorance. How do cameras produce S-RAW and M-RAW? Do they use a subset of the pixels on the sensor or do they reduce the full frame image? How does the result compare (theoretically and/or in real life) with the same shot made with the same lens on a camera with the same number of pixels as the result?


----------



## Del Paso (Jul 31, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> It will have more megapixels than Sony
> It will have faster speeds than Sony
> It will have more DR than Sony
> It will beat Sony in every metric!
> ...


It's about time you send your laser-eyed cats to DXO...


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Jul 31, 2019)

I wonder if they can do DPAF at those high MP's?

If they can, how much intra-frame time will it take to process the AF/metering and then combine the imaging data for 160 million photo cells?

Glad it's not my job to sort that out.


----------



## mb66energy (Jul 31, 2019)

Wow, 80 MPix would be fine ... if they add a raw mode which downsamples it to 20 MPix (1 RGGB group to 1 image pixel) in camera AND via DPP to use 20Mpix directly or 80 MPix always but convert it to a smaller format. Would be great for lower noise/less light, cleaner color and avoidance of color moiree.

But 80 Mpix is strange for video IMO: would be like a 1.4 crop if you use 4k on a 7620 x 4160 pixel large subarea of the sensor.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 31, 2019)

Eersel said:


> What if I told you megapixels wasn't the most important spec of them all?



For some people it is. Hence the existence of high megapixel bodies.


----------



## gzroxas (Jul 31, 2019)

Yes!! It’s not like I desired dual slots, better DR and noise performance, and some better video features to match the competition of every other camera brand!!
(At a price that is not 1.5x the one of other brands)
(I know I can’t speak for everyone, but while I’m sure some people will definitely like the idea of a high MPx camera, I’m sure a whole lot more would just LOVE a better version of the R)


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 31, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> For some people it is. Hence the existence of high megapixel bodies.



Some people are wrong and don't know how to take photographs.


----------



## gdanmitchell (Jul 31, 2019)

When we look at Sony's 26MP 1.5x APS sensors, their new 61MP FF sensor, and their 100MP miniMF sensor we see that they all use what is probably the exact same photo site density, or pixel pitch. In other words, they are likely the same sensor, but scaled up for the larger formats.
It is interesting to extrapolate the same way with Canon's 1.6X APS-C sensors. It appears that a 32.5MP 1.6X APS-C sensor is coming from Canon in the M line. Taking the photo site density of that sensor, which is slightly smaller than the Sony APS-C sensor, and increasing the dimensions to produce a full-frame 24x36mm sensor gets us to_ a bit more than 80MP_. In other words, a 75MP full frame sensor would actually be a slightly conservative move based on technology that Canon already has.
For real fun — and I have heard no rumors that this will happen — if Canon were to expand the area of the 32.5MP 1.6x APS-C sensor to the 33x44mm miniMF format size... it would produce an approximately _140+MP miniMF_ sensor!


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jul 31, 2019)

gzroxas said:


> Yes!! It’s not like I desired dual slots, better DR and noise performance, and some better video features to match the competition of every other camera brand!!
> (At a price that is not 1.5x the one of other brands)
> (I know I can’t speak for everyone, but while I’m sure some people will definitely like the idea of a high MPx camera, I’m sure a whole lot more would just LOVE a better version of the R)



Those things aren't mutually exclusive.


----------



## Maximilian (Jul 31, 2019)

What about those that prefer fewer but better native pixels?


----------



## mk0x55 (Jul 31, 2019)

As for the resolution, fine, I just hope it won't make the processing and storage a major pain point. 

As for the sensor sensitivity & other specs, I'm really looking forward to it. Not really considering a buy before a notable improvement in this department is in place and on the market. This rumor sounds very promising although it is just a CR1. 

Pixel shift like the Sony a7r4 features would be awesome for static motives, too, but not as important as the above.


----------



## N-VB (Jul 31, 2019)

So, its either not enought, or too much.


----------



## max_sr (Jul 31, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> I wonder if they can do DPAF at those high MP's?
> 
> If they can, how much intra-frame time will it take to process the AF/metering and then combine the imaging data for 160 million photo cells?
> 
> Glad it's not my job to sort that out.



Contrast AF is fine for landscapes and product photography.


----------



## max_sr (Jul 31, 2019)

gdanmitchell said:


> ...It appears that a 32.5MP 1.6X APS-C sensor is coming from Canon in the M line. Taking the photo site density of that sensor, which is slightly smaller than the Sony APS-C sensor, and increasing the dimensions to produce a full-frame 24x36mm sensor gets us to_ a bit more than 80MP_. In other words, a 75MP full frame sensor would actually be a slightly conservative move based on technology that Canon already has...



That would make more sense than 75. Nut the number 32.5 is still only a rumor and not neccessarily a technology Canon already has.


----------



## luka73 (Jul 31, 2019)

It's not just the sensor, it's also the processor that counts, especially if you consider that uncropped 4k video feature you all long for. 
Me, I would love a solid 5D replacement, with 4k uncropped video, eye-tracking AF and 10 fps. The good old Canon colour science coupled with a 15-stop dynamic range would also be welcome.
Now, we all have more or less heavily invested into the system and I appreciate cameras and specs are just tools and features of the trade. 
I just want to be reassured that the brand we all rely on continues to provide the advancements we require to be competitive in the market.


----------



## max_sr (Jul 31, 2019)

Maximilian said:


> What about those that prefer fewer but better native pixels?



You will wait, just like the Sony users wait for the A7SIII.


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 31, 2019)

I believe it when I see it. Me thinks hypes like “caught up to Sony” are the ones leads to heavy appointment when actually (if ever) the high megapixel camera comes out. I have been waiting for Canon to release a high megapixel body to replace 5DsR (it didn't matter to me DSLR or MLIC back then) a year after they released 5D4 but no signs of such camera yet. So I got the Sony a7r3 but if ever Canon comes up with a competitive camera most likely I will buy one because of the amazing Canon lenses.


----------



## PGSanta (Jul 31, 2019)

80 MP on full frame would be interesting. If true, I wonder what they have come up with to deal with the diffraction issue at those resolutions.

If it’s just some sort of internally processed bracketing, that’d make for a really slow shooter. I hope it’s something truly innovative if it’s that high MP; something that achieves the resolution density AND makes it widely useable.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 31, 2019)

In many ways this is an interesting and positive rumour.
I can completely understand a birder like AlanF wanting a 70-80MP camera as small birds are pretty small in camera and cropping with a high MP camera can really help.
In many other cases its a complete waste of mega pixels. 
It's useful as a Pixel peeper but not really in print - even billboards don't really need it.

I hope its a better incarnation than the 5DSR.
I found with mine that if you had perfect conditions and shot at ISO 100 to 400 it gave great images. 
Higher than ISO 400 the images are smudgy close up and lack sharpness.
The most annoying thing was the camera didn't seem to be able to keep up with the image size.
Doing something like an event or a wedding checking the camera is infuriating. It is way too slow finishing the buffer and displaying the image.

It would have made the 5DSR a more likeable camera if the processor could have kept up.
If you are used to 24MP and are now going to move to 70-80MP you will be in for a rude awakening with the file sizes. Your memory cards will be too small and your hard drive too small. Storage and backup becomes a pain.

I will be tempted by this camera but I'd prefer a 24-34 MP camera with an excellent focusing system and intelligence when it comes to tracking objects moving within the frame. I like the option to have high FPS in a camera.
If this is 3 to 6 FPS then it wouldn't be attractive to me.
With 70-80MP Canon have to do some trade-offs on what they offer.

For sure I will keep a close eye on it.
I may be tempted by it but I may also keep saving and go for a 1DR or 1DX III depending on what they have on offer.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Jul 31, 2019)

max_sr said:


> Contrast AF is fine for landscapes and product photography.


So is manual focus but I think that's about as likely as a Canon with contrast AF. Given how good the AF appears to be on the A7rIV, and the negative press that Panasonic's S1's AF has been drawing, I think Canon will need a pretty good AF solution if they want to sell mor than a handfull of these. Canon earnings can't be supported on Panasonic level sales figures. IMO, Canon will have to either sort out the DPAF issues or embed a phase detect array in the sensor.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Jul 31, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> Who really cares? Not trying to be sarcastic. A slow, limited feature high megapixel body. A practical crop mode? Good luck.
> 
> This company is the meaning of struggle. If canon thinks that more megapixels is enough to keep them in the lead- with old tech moving all that data around- then they already lost. Canons lineup has no feet. *The R doesn't even have a joystick for moving the focus point*. At $2300. Is this crazy town or what.
> 
> Just like my beautiful 5d3, *I want a reliable, full feature set body without lame firmware compromises*. 60+ MP....interesting, but not critical.



The R doesn't need a joystick. You can move the focus points around with your thumb on the screen whilst looking through the viewfinder. Its quicker and easier to do it with the touchscreen than the joystick. Try it.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jul 31, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I thought we all despised spec wars?



Not Sony users, that is all they have. Same to some extent Nikon users as well.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jul 31, 2019)

12Broncos said:


> Which is why I'm very glad I didn't jump on Sony's ship and sail away to point of no return. Now there's something I'm wondering about. There is a post on Canonwatch.com stating that Canon lenses have a MP limit. Which personally Idk if they do, my guess is no they don't. The new RF lenses coming out I believe should be capable of handling any number of MP.



Well they have been using their L EF lenses on 250 MP sensors with total success and they have shown the photos. So their lenses go to at least 250 MP with no problems at all. I would imagine from what I read of the RF mount lenses being even better than EF mount lenses that the limit will be much higher than 250 MP.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jul 31, 2019)

JoeDavid said:


> I am considering the new Sony and a Metabones EF adapter as a higher MP landscape option. I like my Canon R and would love a high MP body for the RF lenses but, with no announcement in sight, how long do you wait? Plus Canon usually “under-preforms” compared to the initial rumors. I will say that the real world RAW files from the R are quite good (similar to the 5DM4 of course). Canon has moved so slowly with sensor tech improvements in the past it is hard to believe that they would make the leap all the way to a FF backside illuminated 80MP sensor. It could be incredible but I’ll believe it when I see it!



Go for it then.


----------



## Bentley Boy (Jul 31, 2019)

ashmadux said:


> Who really cares? Not trying to be sarcastic. A slow, limited feature high megapixel body. A practical crop mode? Good luck.
> 
> This company is the meaning of struggle. If canon thinks that more megapixels is enough to keep them in the lead- with old tech moving all that data around- then they already lost. Canons lineup has no feet. The R doesn't even have a joystick for moving the focus point. At $2300. Is this crazy town or what.
> 
> Just like my beautiful 5d3, *I want a reliable, full feature set body without lame firmware compromises*. 60+ MP....interesting, but not critical.


This joystick argument is old and tired. The touchscreen is so much faster. Besides, if you’re a company trying to make the transition from smartphone to camera easier, does it make sense to have more buttons/joystick or a great touchscreen? It’s an honest question and one very few people actually think about.


----------



## magarity (Jul 31, 2019)

I think the most interesting thing if any of these unofficial rumors are remotely true is that the manufacturers have collectively decided to stop playing the "buzz" game.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Jul 31, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Not Sony users, that is all they have. Same to some extent Nikon users as well.


I'm pretty sure that what Sony users have is a 60 MP body that shoots 10 FPS with the worlds best tracking AF system. What Canon users have is another rumor about some imaginary camera that may or may not ever exist. If you prefer Canon's, dislike Sony, and can live with that it's fine but pretending that Sony isn't leading the way in mirrorless just makes you sound foolish. Just sayin'


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 31, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> It's useful as a Pixel peeper but not really in print - even billboards don't really need it.



While I would agree we're getting into the realm of diminishing returns, anyone making truly large prints that viewers can walk up to will benefit. With 8688px Canon's 50mp sensor delivers 144 ppi at 60", assuming a 2:3 print. I actually think you can (just) pull this off with a 5Ds/sr, a tack sharp lens, and solid technique. But 80mp would bring a noticeable improvement. Applications that come to mind include large print landscape galleries and window store displays.

These are niche markets to be sure, but they exist, they are demanding, and they have money to spend. Keep in mind people buy and shoot 150mp Phase One backs.



> I hope its a better incarnation than the 5DSR.
> I found with mine that if you had perfect conditions and shot at ISO 100 to 400 it gave great images.
> Higher than ISO 400 the images are smudgy close up and lack sharpness.



Noise doesn't intrude all that much on sharpness and detail even at ISO 3200, something anyone can confirm viewing test photos at various sites. And I honestly feel comfortable going 20x30 or even 24x36 at ISO 3200 if everything else is in order (lens IQ; technique; processing). Not sure what was failing in your workflow above ISO 400, but it wasn't the sensor.



> I will be tempted by this camera but I'd prefer a 24-34 MP camera with an excellent focusing system and intelligence when it comes to tracking objects moving within the frame. I like the option to have high FPS in a camera.



Clearly this is not the only other RF model Canon is going to introduce. We don't even know if it's the next RF model. I wish people would keep that in mind when reading rumors about the high MP RF body.


----------



## Adelino (Jul 31, 2019)

sdz said:


> Removing 1080/24 was an insult to Canon customers even if they had no use for it


It was weird


----------



## AlanF (Jul 31, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> In many ways this is an interesting and positive rumour.
> I can completely understand a birder like AlanF wanting a 70-80MP camera as small birds are pretty small in camera and cropping with a high MP camera can really help.
> In many other cases its a complete waste of mega pixels.
> It's useful as a Pixel peeper but not really in print - even billboards don't really need it.
> ...


1. I am actually happy with 50 Mpx and would find 80 Mpx stretching my drives.
2. I routinely shoot at iso640 as my minimum, and happy with the noise and sharpness. Just delving into my recent files, here are first a couple of shots at iso640, where my admittedly old eyes can't see the noise or smudges (all 100% crops of 1 px = 1 px of original) and then below a typical one at iso1600, where I can massively crop to see the fish in the heron's beak against a dark background and the noise is pretty good and the image is sharp enough given the crop.

Maybe my standards are just very low or perhaps your RAW converter isn't too good. I use DxO PL with standard PRIME, no further noise reduction and no sharpening other than the built-in lens sharpness setting.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 31, 2019)

I have been looking at quite a few posts from Sony A7Rs + 200-600mm and am shocked at the noise. Looked at these for example: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62942069


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 31, 2019)

preppyak said:


> This. I think the issue is less with Canon sensors (though there is room for improvement there), and more with their processing. Though there is certainly a part of me that thinks a 5dIV could do 4k60 and Canon just segmented it out to protect their Cxxx lines.


I never do understand perceptions like this one of 5D IV being "segmented out" to protect the CXXX line. There are features in the CXXX line that the 5DIV and other DSLR and MILC will never have, and are not built to handle, that many cinema cam shooters need and want. Most of those people, in my opinion, won't be dropping down to a 5DIV just because it Canon gave it 4k 60. Two different form factors for two different primary purposes. Two different form factors for two different primary markets. Yes, there is product segmentation in the various lines, but I will never believe Canon is holding back features in the DSLR and MILC lines to protect the cinema line. Not the same product or market.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 31, 2019)

AlanF said:


> 1. I am actually happy with 50 Mpx and would find 80 Mpx stretching my drives.
> 2. I routinely shoot at iso640 as my minimum, and happy with the noise and sharpness. Just delving into my recent files, here are first a couple of shots at iso640, where my admittedly old eyes can't see the noise or smudges (all 100% crops of 1 px = 1 px of original) and then below a typical one at iso1600, where I can massively crop to see the fish in the heron's beak against a dark background and the noise is pretty good and the image is sharp enough given the crop.
> 
> Maybe my standards are just very low or perhaps your RAW converter isn't too good. I use DxO PL with standard PRIME, no further noise reduction and no sharpening other than the built-in lens sharpness setting.
> ...


Great photos! Nothing wrong with them at all. Just beautiful, as always.


----------



## daleg (Jul 31, 2019)

ugh... this is so boring. I have no use for bloated files from over-designed, puffed up sensors. I have both the Nikon D850 and the Canon 5D4. My 1DX2 will soon be for sale - being replaced by an easier to haul Leica M10. Bigger isn't better. Recently I enjoyed a hefty discount on my new Leica Q-P - - as it's replacement (with twice the MP - 47 vs 24) resulted in a major price cut - - see my big smile. Sadly there's no M11 in the near future - t cut prices on the M-10. Dammit.


----------



## addola (Jul 31, 2019)

High megapixel cameras are to be expected from Canon to show off the resolving power of their RF lenses. 

The new sensor technology & catching up to Sony can mean a lot of things. The 30MP sensor on 5DIV & EOS R, and the APS-C 24MP sensor on the M50 are an advancement over their respective predecessor in terms of dynamic range & noise. My M50 has noticeably better dynamic range (at ISO100) than my 6D, and I'll be happy if the new advancements their talking about is "noticeably better" than the current sensors.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jul 31, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I thought we all despised spec wars?



I guess whether or not someone likes a spec war depends on whether they are on the "winning" or "losing" side.. But doesn't a spec war simply benefit the consumer at the end?


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 31, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> I'm pretty sure that what Sony users have is a 60 MP body that shoots 10 FPS with the worlds best tracking AF system. What Canon users have is another rumor about some imaginary camera that may or may not ever exist. If you prefer Canon's, dislike Sony, and can live with that it's fine but pretending that Sony isn't leading the way in mirrorless just makes you sound foolish. Just sayin'


FF or ASP-C? All categories and all features? Video? Don't care about it, personally. Ergonomics? Weather sealing? What about lenses? Sony hasn't had anything over 400mm for years and years until very recently. Blanket statements are rarely true. Canon just got into the FF mirrorless market less than a year ago. So, like everything else in comparable businesses... one company leads with certain features for a while, then the other company does for a while, then another company, all leap frogging each other. I've held a Sony mirrorless. That alone put me off. After that, mega pixels, FPS, and the tracking ability didn't matter... for me. Sometimes I have to hold and shoot a camera with the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II for 12+ hours with no breaks no monopod, no tripod. I can tell you right now, ergonomics matter to me. Sony's ergonomics suck. From my personal perspective, Sony is waaaaayyyyyyyy behind.


----------



## max_sr (Jul 31, 2019)

Cryhavoc said:


> The R doesn't need a joystick. You can move the focus points around with your thumb on the screen whilst looking through the viewfinder. Its quicker and easier to do it with the touchscreen than the joystick. Try it.



Yeah, not really. Not if you use your left eye.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 31, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I have been looking at quite a few posts from Sony A7Rs + 200-600mm and am shocked at the noise. Looked at these for example: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62942069


You can’t look at anybody else’s developing as examples of what you might achieve, you have to arrive at an optimal setting for your own uses after trying a variety of processors and processes. DxO PL Prime works very well for your 5Ds files, obviously the linked images were not treated as well by whatever processor and process was used on them.


----------



## victorshikhman (Jul 31, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Yes, there is product segmentation in the various lines, but I will never believe Canon is holding back features in the DSLR and MILC lines to protect the cinema line. Not the same product or market.



Good for you... Canon Fan Boy. We all get to believe whatever we want these days.

Anyway, perfectly happy with my 80D here. Thinking of picking up a 70-200 F/4 II refurb on the next sale. It's an incredible lens, and great lenses are a major reason to stick with Canon, for now, as are ease of use, ergonomics... and all the damn time we already invested in learning the system workflow. I'll be keeping my 80D until there's a BSI sensor with 4-5 stops of IBIS, in a weather resistant body, with a flip-out touchscreen and competent eye AF. But quality on-sensor IBIS would be huge for me. Some other things would be nice (8+ FPS), but not critical, and megapixels are definitely the lowest on the list.

Or... or... I'll just pick up a Nikon Z6 in a year or so, refurb of course, especially if they keep improving the eye AF software, and especially if there's a good adapter for Canon lenses.


----------



## melgross (Jul 31, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I thought we all despised spec wars?



We do—until it’s in our favor.


----------



## victorshikhman (Jul 31, 2019)

I was just curious, so I googled Nikon Z6 refurb.
For fruit's sake. B&H has refurb Z6 for $1350, $1800 with a 24-70 F/4, which seems like a fine enough lens.
Breathe... breathe... I don't need it.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 31, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> You can’t look at anybody else’s developing as examples of what you might achieve, you have to arrive at an optimal setting for your own uses after trying a variety of processors and processes. DxO PL Prime works very well for your 5Ds files, obviously the linked images were not treated as well by whatever processor and process was used on them.


You are quite right, of course. I started off with this site https://www.flickr.com/groups/sony200-600/pool/with/48319564676/ The images from the A9 are generally good but there are some dreadful ones from the A7RIII, the likes of which you never see posted here.


----------



## gzroxas (Jul 31, 2019)

twoheadedboy said:


> Those things aren't mutually exclusive.


True, though usually higher MPx is connected to poorer low light performance and dynamic range, since the individual pixels have to be smaller (given the same size of the sensor)


----------



## Canon1966 (Jul 31, 2019)

This is nice to hear. To me it's just not MP, but IBIS, eye AF and articulating screen as well for a stills camera. But yes I would love for Canon to be considered #1 instead of lagging behind.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Jul 31, 2019)

max_sr said:


> Yeah, not really. Not if you use your left eye.



huh?
You still use your thumb on the screen. You can select either the right side or left side of the screen to be used for moving the focus point to allow for the right or left thumb to be used.


----------



## Stereodude (Jul 31, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I never do understand perceptions like this one of 5D IV being "segmented out" to protect the CXXX line. There are features in the CXXX line that the 5DIV and other DSLR and MILC will never have, and are not built to handle, that many cinema cam shooters need and want. Most of those people, in my opinion, won't be dropping down to a 5DIV just because it Canon gave it 4k 60. Two different form factors for two different primary purposes. Two different form factors for two different primary markets. Yes, there is product segmentation in the various lines, but I will never believe Canon is holding back features in the DSLR and MILC lines to protect the cinema line. Not the same product or market.


So is your contention that the DSLRs are not held back or that Canon is holding them back for some other reason?


----------



## diegopisante (Jul 31, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



No matter how much megapixels Sony use, Canon never follow Nikon, they will not follow Sony on this...wait for a killer AF bring by Canon in the mirrorless system with the pro body!


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 31, 2019)

AlanF said:


> 1. I am actually happy with 50 Mpx and would find 80 Mpx stretching my drives.
> 2. I routinely shoot at iso640 as my minimum, and happy with the noise and sharpness. Just delving into my recent files, here are first a couple of shots at iso640, where my admittedly old eyes can't see the noise or smudges (all 100% crops of 1 px = 1 px of original) and then below a typical one at iso1600, where I can massively crop to see the fish in the heron's beak against a dark background and the noise is pretty good and the image is sharp enough given the crop.
> 
> Maybe my standards are just very low or perhaps your RAW converter isn't too good. I use DxO PL with standard PRIME, no further noise reduction and no sharpening other than the built-in lens sharpness setting.
> ...



VERY nice shots and great example of cropping when you have enough MPX. I love the water drops coming off the beak in the last shot. I know a pro photographer that uses a 5dS R because of the ability to crop when he does't have quite enough lens on a trip.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 31, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> So is your contention that the DSLRs are not held back or that Canon is holding them back for some other reason?


Why is product differentiation a difficult concept to grasp? Does a Mustang have the same features as an F150?


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jul 31, 2019)

jayphotoworks said:


> I guess whether or not someone likes a spec war depends on whether they are on the "winning" or "losing" side.. But doesn't a spec war simply benefit the consumer at the end?



Sounds like a question from someone who has never experienced getting stuck with options exceeding what they need. I don't need a Transit van with auto door locks, tire pressure sensors, etc.., but I definitely get stuck with the purchase cost since no other alternative was available.

So if every brand went 75 megapixels and jacked computer processing and storage costs, and replacement of lenses,, certainly the specs would jack costs for a lot of people.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 31, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> So is your contention that the DSLRs are not held back or that Canon is holding them back for some other reason?


Read it again.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 31, 2019)

max_sr said:


> Yeah, not really. Not if you use your left eye.


Not true.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Jul 31, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> FF or ASP-C? All categories and all features? Video? Don't care about it, personally. Ergonomics? Weather sealing? What about lenses? Sony hasn't had anything over 400mm for years and years until very recently. Blanket statements are rarely true. Canon just got into the FF mirrorless market less than a year ago. So, like everything else in comparable businesses... one company leads with certain features for a while, then the other company does for a while, then another company, all leap frogging each other. I've held a Sony mirrorless. That alone put me off. After that, mega pixels, FPS, and the tracking ability didn't matter... for me. Sometimes I have to hold and shoot a camera with the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II for 12+ hours with no breaks no monopod, no tripod. I can tell you right now, ergonomics matter to me. Sony's ergonomics suck. From my personal perspective, Sony is waaaaayyyyyyyy behind.


Plenty to like about Canon and plenty to dislike about Sony but if you can't appreciate the extent to which Sony is driving camera tech forward I don't know what to tell you. Canon is the world's largest camera company with decades of experience and for the most part they have been chasing Sony's tail for the last several years. It's a little sad. 

Canon's cameras, like pretty much every camera made in the last decade or so, still produce fine images but the tech gap is widening every day. I understand why that gets on some peoples nerves but it's not Sony's fault that Canon isn't keeping up.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 31, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> So is your contention that the DSLRs are not held back or that Canon is holding them back for some other reason?



Best guess is that Canon has either a readout speed issue or a downstream processing speed issue leading to cropped 4k, slower frame rates, and eye AF performance issues relative to the competition. When the 5D4 was released the cropped 4k might have looked like a marketing decision, but in retrospect it was likely a technical one.

While I often debate perceived shortcomings on Canon's part (DR; high ISO noise), it's hard to deny that Canon has some performance issue at the sensor or processor related to reading pixels at a high frame rate. It does not kill them as some pretend. But I certainly hope with their next generation sensors it is resolved.

If the M5/M6 rumors are any indication, it will be.


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Jul 31, 2019)

victorshikhman said:


> I was just curious, so I googled Nikon Z6 refurb.
> For fruit's sake. B&H has refurb Z6 for $1350, $1800 with a 24-70 F/4, which seems like a fine enough lens.
> Breathe... breathe... I don't need it.



Walmart had it with the lens NEW for about $2000.


----------



## 6degrees (Jul 31, 2019)

Canon RF lenses are designed for the next generation of photography, ahead of everybody else.

Canon RF body? They will catch up. No big deal for this.


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Jul 31, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...




How big of a market is the 5D series ?
I assume it’s small
Less than the rebel, 7d, 5D mark, and even the 1D
If that’s so then this will make some niche people happy.
I remain interested in the tech that canon has been behind in: speed and AF.

Basically I am waiting for the mirrorless 7d or 1D replacement. I am due for an upgrade.


----------



## WideAngle (Jul 31, 2019)

Right, my first post here. Been checking and reading a few months, kept my opinions to myself. But by now I'm getting really tired of all of the focus on the RF equipment. I've tested it, worked with it, and it feels like a kids toy. I can't work with it, I won't work with it, I'm not going to switch or invest in any way in RF equipment.

It would be nice if there would be some sign of acknowledgement that EF is not dead, and that there are still people who want developments in that area. My wish list of EF-related equipment is growing every month, but I've completely stopped investing in it as I'm not going to throw money down the drain.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 31, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Plenty to like about Canon and plenty to dislike about Sony but if you can't appreciate the extent to which Sony is driving camera tech forward I don't know what to tell you. Canon is the world's largest camera company with decades of experience and for the most part they have been chasing Sony's tail for the last several years. It's a little sad.



Sony has driven things forward in some respects. But a lot of the 'forward drive' in Sony's products has actually been spent chasing Canon's tail along with the tail of every mature DSLR manufacturer. It's easy to look at the A7 series and see four generations of improvement while forgetting that it was the _third_ _generation_ before the AF could compete with SLR AF, as but one example. It's also easy to forget all the sensor imaging problems Sony has had over these generations. Off sensor flare, compressed RAW artifacts, star eaters, striping. And do I dare mention ergonomics and weather sealing?

These things are fresh in my memory because I carefully researched and considered buying every single A7R released. And every time there was a 'show stopper' issue that would have killed it for me even if I otherwise would have gone Sony. In a twist of irony, I _finally gave up waiting for Sony to catch up_ and moved to the 5Ds.

Sony is a competitive force which is ultimately good for everyone. But it's grating to hear over and over again how far ahead they are based on a selected subset of considerations which happen to play to their strengths.


----------



## Timedog (Jul 31, 2019)

Ugh. Too much. Hopefully it'll allow smaller size raw files for the 95% of the time when I don't want that much resolution due to file sizes and processing power. How are small raw sizes made in camera though? Is there loss of quality vs a sensor that has that smaller resolution natively?


----------



## serhatakbal (Jul 31, 2019)

lider her zaman Canon ve her zaman piksel savaşını kazanacak! <3


----------



## sdz (Aug 1, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> snip
> 
> Sony is a competitive force which is ultimately good for everyone. But _it's grating to hear over and over again_ [emphasis added] how far ahead they are based on a selected subset of considerations which happen to play to their strengths.



This. Sony has surged ahead in sensor development. And Canon needs to respond in kind. But, photographers do take great photos using Canon gear. It's mindless boosterism to claim otherwise.


----------



## melgross (Aug 1, 2019)

You know, with all the disparaging of the “megapixel wars”, people seem to forget that those wars, thought of back then as the sharpness wars, began in the very beginning of photography, in the early 19th century.

This is nothing new, and I don’t understand why some seem so upset about it.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Aug 1, 2019)

If the specs of M5/M6 II, 90D and EOS Rs (say) are correct (at least Rs's sensor) maybe Canon has finally awoken form it's 12 year self-induced coma. It's not a moment too late as they need urgent action to chnage public perception. These are encouraging signs but of course nothing is released yet, so let's wait and see.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 1, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Plenty to like about Canon and plenty to dislike about Sony but if you can't appreciate the extent to which Sony is driving camera tech forward I don't know what to tell you. Canon is the world's largest camera company with decades of experience and for the most part they have been chasing Sony's tail for the last several years. It's a little sad.
> 
> Canon's cameras, like pretty much every camera made in the last decade or so, still produce fine images but the tech gap is widening every day. I understand why that gets on some peoples nerves but it's not Sony's fault that Canon isn't keeping up.


Ummm... I think you misunderstand. This is what grates the nerves and I am gosh darn proud not to have spent money on Sony.: (From Imaging-Resource) BTW: still waiting on DPAF from Sony. Not really. Ergonomics on the Sony FF mirrorless line are just as bad as those on my M43 Olympus. The difference? My fingers are not crammed into the "slot" on the Olympus. One would think Sony could at least fix this problem, but no. 4th generation, s.o.s. For people who spend hours holding a camera by the grip with a big heavy lens, ergonomics are king. On a typical model boot camp weekend we are shooting 6-8 individual models each day with each having 3 different looks (Different clothing from designers). Might as well be 18-24 models each photographer. The day begins at 7am and doesn't end until sundown. Very fast paced and no breaks. Spare me the tech talk. Also, no top LCD. The two times my photos have been published, the editors didn't care what I used. They just liked the results. My post focused on ergonomics. That is a technology Sony doesn't seem to know anything about. Use what works for you. Does not bother me one bit. Sony doesn't work for me no matter what they cram in that deck of cards.


----------



## venusFivePhotoStudio (Aug 1, 2019)

WideAngle said:


> Right, my first post here. Been checking and reading a few months, kept my opinions to myself. But by now I'm getting really tired of all of the focus on the RF equipment. I've tested it, worked with it, and it feels like a kids toy. I can't work with it, I won't work with it, I'm not going to switch or invest in any way in RF equipment.
> 
> It would be nice if there would be some sign of acknowledgement that EF is not dead, and that there are still people who want developments in that area. My wish list of EF-related equipment is growing every month, but I've completely stopped investing in it as I'm not going to throw money down the drain.



Me, too I had the same feeling with the R. But I hope for a professional RF camera.


----------



## Stereodude (Aug 1, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Why is product differentiation a difficult concept to grasp? Does a Mustang have the same features as an F150?


It's not hard to grasp. It's how they do it that draws ire. Did Ford remove the back seat from the Mustang to protect sedan sales? How about keeping the power down on the F150 so that people would have to buy a Mustang if they want to go fast?

I swear some of you would support Canon even if they made it so their L lenses wouldn't work on their non-pro cameras models saying it's simply a product differentiation thing and the people complaining about such a limitation don't get it.



dtaylor said:


> Best guess is that Canon has either a readout speed issue or a downstream processing speed issue leading to cropped 4k, slower frame rates, and eye AF performance issues relative to the competition. When the 5D4 was released the cropped 4k might have looked like a marketing decision, but in retrospect it was likely a technical one.
> ...


None of which for example explains why p24 video has vanished from the new cameras. They clearly removed it for a non-technical reason.

It sure seems like Canon tries to remove as much as they think they can get away with from every model to create artificial market segmentation at each price point. Whereas it seems like Nikon and Sony try to put as much as possible into each models for their price point regardless if one of their lower end models might at least temporarily surpass the capability of an older higher end model.


Edit:
For example, Canon would never put the sort of AF features the new RX100 VII has (whether it needs them or not). They would never put features or tech borrowed directly from their top end cameras in a P&S. Heck Canon won't even put their top end metering or AF in a 2nd tier camera.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 1, 2019)

WideAngle said:


> Right, my first post here. Been checking and reading a few months, kept my opinions to myself. But by now I'm getting really tired of all of the focus on the RF equipment. I've tested it, worked with it, and it feels like a kids toy. I can't work with it, I won't work with it, I'm not going to switch or invest in any way in RF equipment.
> 
> It would be nice if there would be some sign of acknowledgement that EF is not dead, and that there are still people who want developments in that area. My wish list of EF-related equipment is growing every month, but I've completely stopped investing in it as I'm not going to throw money down the drain.


Welcome to the Forum!

I would also like to see something new happen with EF.....

As to the RF mount, so far we have seen two low end FF cameras. This is not enough to pas judgement on the system yet. Personally, I think that when we start seeing higher end units that they will be of similar size to their EF equivalents because they are going to need bigger batteries and they are going to need space for multiple processors and heat dissipation. Even the top end Oly has had to forego the tiny form factor because of this.


----------



## Stereodude (Aug 1, 2019)

WideAngle said:


> Right, my first post here. Been checking and reading a few months, kept my opinions to myself. But by now I'm getting really tired of all of the focus on the RF equipment. I've tested it, worked with it, and it feels like a kids toy. I can't work with it, I won't work with it, I'm not going to switch or invest in any way in RF equipment.
> 
> It would be nice if there would be some sign of acknowledgement that EF is not dead, and that there are still people who want developments in that area. My wish list of EF-related equipment is growing every month, but I've completely stopped investing in it as I'm not going to throw money down the drain.


There is not such an acknowledgement. There's one to the opposite of what you want. It's written pretty clearly in their Q2 financial guidance that they're betting the future on mirrorless and that the DSLR market is contracting rapidly and will continue to do so. So while others are making fun of Sony for taking several generations to get their MILC cameras competitive with DSLRs from Canon or Nikon they seem to be ignoring that Canon isn't exactly setting the standard in MILC cameras and is going to be playing catch-up.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 1, 2019)

WideAngle said:


> ...It would be nice if there would be some sign of acknowledgement that EF is not dead, and that there are still people who want developments in that area. My wish list of EF-related equipment is growing every month, but I've completely stopped investing in it as I'm not going to throw money down the drain.


I believe Canon executives have stated in public interviews that EF is not dead and that RF is just another option (paraphrasing)


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 1, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Why is product differentiation a difficult concept to grasp? Does a Mustang have the same features as an F150?


My F150 has 450hp stock engine, has Ford Performance printed on the step plate and is a beast from the factory. Not all F150's are created equal. I am very sure the mustang has backup cameras, ac, satellite radio, collision alert and all the adds the F150 has. Hopefully it has the AC seats so I can keep my but cool in summer. Neither one will take a photo so I am not sure why people make auto comparisons to cameras here.


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> So while others are making fun of Sony for taking several generations to get their MILC cameras competitive with DSLRs from Canon or Nikon they seem to be ignoring that Canon isn't exactly setting the standard in MILC cameras and is going to be playing catch-up.



The 28-70 f/2 doesn't set the standard? The 50 and 85 f/1.2? The other impending RF lenses?


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> None of which for example explains why p24 video has vanished from the new cameras. They clearly removed it for a non-technical reason.



If you are referring to 4k 24fps video: The RP, R, 5D Mark IV and 1DX Mark II all have 4k 24fps. So, what are you talking about?



Stereodude said:


> Did Ford remove the back seat from the Mustang to protect sedan sales? How about keeping the power down on the F150 so that people would have to buy a Mustang if they want to go fast?



No, Ford removed the truck bed and cabs from the F-150 so people could have a Muscle Car and named it "Mustang". They also knew most pickup truck drivers don't want convertible tops. They only put two doors because most people looking at Mustangs don't want 4 doors on a car like that. The back seat in the Mustang is useless when I'm in the car... except for grocery hauling. The back seat in a 4 door F-150 is good. They also intentionally crippled the trucks by not having 6 doors and a hatch back. Most also are not loading children into baby seats in Mustangs. Your comparisons of cars is just weird. Any car made these days can go fast. When I lived in Nevada, I used to get my Focus up to 110 mph (not the upper limit of it's speed). Can a Mustang or Raptor go faster? Probably, but that is a moot point. They put you in jail for that. "Quick" (0-60) is an entirely different thing. Your trouble with the subject you are complaining about is obvious. Why not just buy a Sony and be happy? Or at least look up the specs before saying such outlandish things about cameras you know nothing about and don't own.

The problem is people who think a manufacturer is making cameras just for them. No. Manufacturers have to make their stuff for the mass market they wish to capture (Canon is very good at this). You ain't the market, obviously. Go buy what you want. Nobody cares.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 1, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> My F150 has 450hp stock engine, has Ford Performance printed on the step plate and is a beast from the factory. Not all F150's are created equal. I am very sure the mustang has backup cameras, ac, satellite radio, collision alert and all the adds the F150 has. Hopefully it has the AC seats so I can keep my but cool in summer. Neither one will take a photo so I am not sure why people make auto comparisons to cameras here.


They all have different trim, engine, and dozens of other options too... all at different price points and people have to pay for each. Crazy comparison to Cameras. Sometimes.


----------



## Pape (Aug 1, 2019)

Eersel said:


> What if I told you megapixels wasn't the most important spec of them all?


Just give me 500mpixel one for 500E . I dont mind if it got 10 DR ,1fps ,manual focus ,sharp nails protdruding from grip, one card what records only half of pictures randomly. 
Sorry if i upset someone ,just honest opinion . not searching argue.  I can use RP when wanting those later specs.


----------



## max_sr (Aug 1, 2019)

Cryhavoc said:


> huh?
> You still use your thumb on the screen. You can select either the right side or left side of the screen to be used for moving the focus point to allow for the right or left thumb to be used.



Sorry it doesn't work. Your nose or cheek will constantly change the focus point.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 1, 2019)

max_sr said:


> Sorry it doesn't work. Your nose or cheek will constantly change the focus point.


Nope. Not true. With your left eye to the viewfinder your nose will be on the very edge of the right side... the inactive area of the screen. Same with the right, except the nose is to the left. Cheek doesn't bother it either. Pull your face away and the screen is fully active again. If you own an RP or R and that is happening to you, you don't have it set correctly. It can be set for left side, or right side.

Honestly don't know why people make comments like this when they have not tried the camera or read the manual, or at least the menu.


----------



## max_sr (Aug 1, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Nope. Not true. With your left eye to the viewfinder your nose will be on the very edge of the right side... the inactive area of the screen. Same with the right, except the nose is to the left. Cheek doesn't bother it either. Pull your face away and the screen is fully active again. If you own an RP or R and that is happening to you, you don't have it set correctly. It can be set for left side, or right side.
> 
> Honestly don't know why people make comments like this when they have not tried the camera or read the manual, or at least the menu.




Honestly don't know why people tell me my own experience is wrong and did not happen. Be happy if it works for you, but don't tell me it works for me.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 1, 2019)

max_sr said:


> Honestly don't know why people tell me my own experience is wrong and did not happen. Be happy if it works for you, but don't tell me it works for me.


Below, when speaking about the RP.


max_sr said:


> I already bought the A7III, because I needed better lowlight video, so I agree with you, that everybody should buy what they want. But I don't really like to use two systems at a time and the time will come, when I decide to either ditch Canon or Sony. And it depends on two things: Canons fullframe mirrorless cameras and the 7DIII or whatever Canon will bring to replace it. And of course on Sony's A7000.



So I don't know what your experience was, but it wasn't set correctly. I weigh 300 lbs (fat cheeks) and have a big fat nose. No problem at all. If I set the camera for right side and use my left eye, yeah, problems exactly like you experienced. Not set correctly.

It can be set for whole panel, top, bottom, left side, right side, top right, top left, bottom right, bottom left.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 1, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Ummm... I think you misunderstand. This is what grates the nerves and I am gosh darn proud not to have spent money on Sony.: (From Imaging-Resource) BTW: still waiting on DPAF from Sony. Not really. Ergonomics on the Sony FF mirrorless line are just as bad as those on my M43 Olympus. The difference? My fingers are not crammed into the "slot" on the Olympus. One would think Sony could at least fix this problem, but no. 4th generation, s.o.s. For people who spend hours holding a camera by the grip with a big heavy lens, ergonomics are king. On a typical model boot camp weekend we are shooting 6-8 individual models each day with each having 3 different looks (Different clothing from designers). Might as well be 18-24 models each photographer. The day begins at 7am and doesn't end until sundown. Very fast paced and no breaks. Spare me the tech talk. Also, no top LCD. The two times my photos have been published, the editors didn't care what I used. They just liked the results. My post focused on ergonomics. That is a technology Sony doesn't seem to know anything about. Use what works for you. Does not bother me one bit. Sony doesn't work for me no matter what they cram in that deck of cards.



Judging from the "hands on" videos on youtube, the A7R4 has more space between the grip and lensmount.


----------



## Stuart (Aug 1, 2019)

masterpix said:


> "Caught up with sony" can mean: 1) higher dynamic range 2 )higher low light sensitivity (cmbined with higher dynamic range means even better night shots) and 3) lower noise. I hppe this comes to the new 7D/9D/90D and the 1Dx too.


As a canon shooter i want Canon to surpass others in the market.


----------



## Antono Refa (Aug 1, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Well they have been using their L EF lenses on 250 MP sensors with total success and they have shown the photos.



Out of curiosity, could you, please, give pointers?


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Aug 1, 2019)

daleg said:


> ugh... this is so boring. I have no use for bloated files from over-designed, puffed up sensors. I have both the Nikon D850 and the Canon 5D4. My 1DX2 will soon be for sale - being replaced by an easier to haul Leica M10. Bigger isn't better. Recently I enjoyed a hefty discount on my new Leica Q-P - - as it's replacement (with twice the MP - 47 vs 24) resulted in a major price cut - - see my big smile. Sadly there's no M11 in the near future - t cut prices on the M-10. Dammit.



That’s a lot of expensive cameras. Wanna buy me one?


----------



## AlanF (Aug 1, 2019)

achelseaphotographer said:


> I, for one, would buy it if it were an SLR, but I am not buying into the R system. I am happy with my A7R3 and with my D850. I rather get the A7R4.


Wow! You joined CR this morning just to tell us that!


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Aug 1, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> My F150 has 450hp stock engine, has Ford Performance printed on the step plate and is a beast from the factory. Not all F150's are created equal. I am very sure the mustang has backup cameras, ac, satellite radio, collision alert and all the adds the F150 has. Hopefully it has the AC seats so I can keep my but cool in summer. Neither one will take a photo so I am not sure why people make auto comparisons to cameras here.


Does it have a reversing camera?


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

Jasonmc89 said:


> That’s a lot of expensive cameras. Wanna buy me one?



I am more curious about how a Leica M-10 can be considered a replacement for a 1dx2. Obviously someone was not using the 1dx2to anything close to its capabilities


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 1, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> I am more curious about how a Leica M-10 can be considered a replacement for a 1dx2. Obviously someone was not using the 1dx2to anything close to its capabilities



Well, they both show that you spent €7k on a camera that can be used to hammer nails into wood if the need arises.


----------



## max_sr (Aug 1, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Below, when speaking about the RP.
> 
> 
> So I don't know what your experience was, but it wasn't set correctly. I weigh 300 lbs (fat cheeks) and have a big fat nose. No problem at all. If I set the camera for right side and use my left eye, yeah, problems exactly like you experienced. Not set correctly.
> ...



And this is related to the touch screen thing in what way? I know you can set the active touch screen area to your liking. But it didn't work for me. There is a reason for an AF-joystick and I won't buy another camera without it. I don't care if you can use the touchscreen or the 4-way pad on the back.


----------



## Timedog (Aug 1, 2019)

Cryhavoc said:


> The R doesn't need a joystick. You can move the focus points around with your thumb on the screen whilst looking through the viewfinder. Its quicker and easier to do it with the touchscreen than the joystick. Try it.


Nah the touch and drag AF sucks because they didn't add a user customizable sensitivity setting to relative mode, a feature that's basically been in every other mouse-like interface made in the last 30 years. 

If you don't use relative mode it forces you to hold the camera weird.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 1, 2019)

achelseaphotographer said:


> I, for one, would buy it if it were an SLR, but I am not buying into the R system. I am happy with my A7R3 and with my D850. I rather get the A7R4.


OK, your decision.
But why do you lose time on a Canon forum, just to criticize? In case you haven't got it, the subject of this forum is "High MP Canon mirrorless", not "I'm so in love with Wonderful Sony".


----------



## Stereodude (Aug 1, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> If you are referring to 4k 24fps video: The RP, R, 5D Mark IV and 1DX Mark II all have 4k 24fps. So, what are you talking about?


No, I'm referring to the fact that they won't give quality p24 on their cameras. For example, the R can't shoot 1080p24. The new G series Powershots can't shoot 1080p24 or 2160p24. Canon will only give you p24 as long as the footage has some obvious visual problem with it to keep a serious critical user from using it. So, if the camera has a crazy crop in 4K and bad rolling shutter that makes everything look like jello, sure they'll give you 4Kp24 because the footage is substandard. But if the camera uses the whole sensor (no crop) and doesn't have bad rolling shutter or some other pretty obvious visual flaw (in that resolution) you're not getting p24 So, in the case of the R that means no 1080p24. In other models that means to 1080p24 or 2160p24. After all, Canon has Cx00 cameras to protect. Apparently even from their P&S lineup.



CanonFanBoy said:


> They all have different trim, engine, and dozens of other options too... all at different price points and people have to pay for each. Crazy comparison to Cameras. Sometimes.


Wait, you mean they'll sell you the options you want in the body style you want? Crazy... They should be like Canon and make all their models with only one trim level and no options. Take it or leave it. I'm glad you decided to go with this analogy to back your argument.



Jasonmc89 said:


> Does it have a reversing camera?


The new F150s have 4 cameras, not just a reversing camera.


----------



## wockawocka (Aug 1, 2019)

Anything less that 100mp will seem silly. 60mp is already crazy high. Just jump the shark for mass media attention.

But um, real pixel binning down to 50 and 30mp would be nice.


----------



## tron (Aug 1, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> OK, your decision.
> But why do you lose time on a Canon forum, just to criticize? In case you haven't got it, the subject of this forum is "High MP Canon mirrorless", not "I'm so in love with Wonderful Sony".


Correct response but I agree with the poster in one point: Although I do not have and I do not care about Sony and Nikon I shoot birds with medium to big whites and I would like a 5DsR Mark II not a mirrorless camera. So I got a second 5DsR since I found it in a very good price. If Canon makes a mirror version then I guess I can sell them. I do not want an EVF neither an adaptor. But if they make it an R type it will just be a nice studio and landscape camera.


----------



## caffetin (Aug 1, 2019)

tron said:


> Correct response but I agree with the poster in one point: Although I do not have and I do not care about Sony and Nikon I shoot birds with medium to big whites and I would like a 5DsR Mark II not a mirrorless camera. So I got a second 5DsR since I found it in a very good price. If Canon makes a mirror version then I guess I can sell them. I do not want an EVF neither an adaptor. But if they make it an R type it will just be a nice studio and landscape camera.


if it is true,why only landscape.i mean we would have so many mp to make what we want.


----------



## tron (Aug 1, 2019)

An 80 Mpixel camera would a DLA less than f/5.6. EOS 80D has a DLA of f/6.0 and this is equivalent to a 60Mpixel FF camera!

OK not a problem for fast primes or zooms up to f/5.6. I guess after that it would just gradually (and not always obviously) degrade and we can always have an equivalent of a very sharp less Mpixel camera so no actual loss just a gain on good lighting conditions.


----------



## tron (Aug 1, 2019)

caffetin said:


> if it is true,why only landscape.i mean we would have so many mp to make what we want.


Correct! Just guessing the more probable use but of course the use is up to camera's user.


----------



## caffetin (Aug 1, 2019)

achelseaphotographer said:


> I, for one, would buy it if it were an SLR, but I am not buying into the R system. I am happy with my A7R3 and with my D850. I rather get the A7R4.


stay to sony and leave the forum.dont waste your and espesially OUR TIME.


----------



## tron (Aug 1, 2019)

achelseaphotographer said:


> I, for one, would buy it if it were an SLR, but I am not buying into the R system. I am happy with my A7R3 and with my D850. I rather get the A7R4.


Maybe that's me but your argument would seem more genuine if you had not mentioned both mirrorless and a camera with mirror. You either prefer cameras with mirrors like Nikon D850 (a nice choice anyway) and in that case both a Sony and a mirrorless Canon do not suit you so much or you are into mirrorless cameras and you cannot reject a mirrorless Canon not yet announced saying that you would be interested if it had a mirror.

I use only Canon EF system so I have a point to continue wishing for a 5DsR Mark II...

By the way you already have Nikon and Sony. You wouldn't need a Canon. These things need expensive lenses in front of them!


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

tron said:


> Maybe that's me but your argument would seem more genuine if you had not mentioned both mirrorless and a camera with mirror. You either prefer cameras with mirrors like Nikon D850 (a nice choice anyway) and in that case both a Sony and a mirrorless Canon do not suit you so much or you are into mirrorless cameras and you cannot reject a mirrorless Canon not yet announced saying that you would be interested if it had a mirror.
> 
> I use only Canon EF system so I have a point to continue wishing for a 5DsR Mark II...
> 
> By the way you already have Nikon and Sony. You wouldn't need a Canon. These things need expensive lenses in front of them!


Not just you. Everyone else thinks the comment was stupid.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> No, I'm referring to the fact that they won't give quality p24 on their cameras. For example, the R can't shoot 1080p24. The new G series Powershots can't shoot 1080p24 or 2160p24. Canon will only give you p24 as long as the footage has some obvious visual problem with it to keep a serious critical user from using it. So, if the camera has a crazy crop in 4K and bad rolling shutter that makes everything look like jello, sure they'll give you 4Kp24 because the footage is substandard. But if the camera uses the whole sensor (no crop) and doesn't have bad rolling shutter or some other pretty obvious visual flaw (in that resolution) you're not getting p24 So, in the case of the R that means no 1080p24. In other models that means to 1080p24 or 2160p24. After all, Canon has Cx00 cameras to protect. Apparently even from their P&S lineup.
> 
> 
> Wait, you mean they'll sell you the options you want in the body style you want? Crazy... They should be like Canon and make all their models with only one trim level and no options. Take it or leave it. I'm glad you decided to go with this analogy to back your argument.
> ...


So we've now moved the goal posts yet again. From the newer cams having no 4k 24p to "quality". Same with 1080 24p.

Again, your car analogy is weird. Cars sell far more units, are far larger, and far more expensive. How's that paint option and reverse camera thing with Sony? Wow.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 1, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> So we've now moved the goal posts yet again. From the newer cams having no 4k 24p to "quality". Same with 1080 24p.


But Canon is losing the huge market of folks who use PowerShots to make movies for projection in theaters.


----------



## amorse (Aug 1, 2019)

AlanF said:


> 1. I am actually happy with 50 Mpx and would find 80 Mpx stretching my drives.
> 2. I routinely shoot at iso640 as my minimum, and happy with the noise and sharpness. Just delving into my recent files, here are first a couple of shots at iso640, where my admittedly old eyes can't see the noise or smudges (all 100% crops of 1 px = 1 px of original) and then below a typical one at iso1600, where I can massively crop to see the fish in the heron's beak against a dark background and the noise is pretty good and the image is sharp enough given the crop.
> 
> Maybe my standards are just very low or perhaps your RAW converter isn't too good. I use DxO PL with standard PRIME, no further noise reduction and no sharpening other than the built-in lens sharpness setting.
> ...


That is a tremendous amount of detail for 100% crops! Great images too!


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> No, I'm referring to the fact that they won't give quality p24 on their cameras. For example, the R can't shoot 1080p24. The new G series Powershots can't shoot 1080p24 or 2160p24. Canon will only give you p24 as long as the footage has some obvious visual problem with it to keep a serious critical user from using it. So, if the camera has a crazy crop in 4K and bad rolling shutter that makes everything look like jello, sure they'll give you 4Kp24 because the footage is substandard. But if the camera uses the whole sensor (no crop) and doesn't have bad rolling shutter or some other pretty obvious visual flaw (in that resolution) you're not getting p24 So, in the case of the R that means no 1080p24. In other models that means to 1080p24 or 2160p24. After all, Canon has Cx00 cameras to protect. Apparently even from their P&S lineup.
> 
> 
> Wait, you mean they'll sell you the options you want in the body style you want? Crazy... They should be like Canon and make all their models with only one trim level and no options. Take it or leave it. I'm glad you decided to go with this analogy to back your argument.
> ...


And one gets what one pays for. That another brand offers at a higher or lower price and binned with more or less features is something else. People vote with their $. We'll have to wait and see how people vote over the next year or so.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 1, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Wow! You joined CR this morning just to tell us that!


 Yup. Par for the course.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> Wait, you mean they'll sell you the options you want in the body style you want?



Who, car makers? No. They offer certain options in certain models.


----------



## Stereodude (Aug 1, 2019)

stevelee said:


> But Canon is losing the huge market of folks who use PowerShots to make movies for projection in theaters.


No matter how many times you post this it's still not going to be true. Somehow you can't seem to comprehend that people want to shoot p24 because they want their footage to look like p24 when they watch it. No matter how many times it's been explained to you continue to insist that p24 is only used or useful in theaters.



CanonFanBoy said:


> And one gets what one pays for. That another brand offers at a higher or lower price and binned with more or less features is something else. People vote with their $. We'll have to wait and see how people vote over the next year or so.


People are voting with their wallets. Canon's camera sales look to be in the start of a death spiral. Their camera sales are down 24.9% in Q2 of 2019 in terms of dollars compared to Q2 of 2018. In terms of number of units it's 22% in ILC's and 17% for other digital cameras Q2/2019 to Q2/2018. They're projecting a loss of 17% and 18% for the year 2019 vs. 2018 for ILC's and other digital cameras respectively. They even admit as much.



Canon said:


> While Canon has been working towards expanded sales of mirrorless cameras, unit sales of interchangeable lens digital cameras decreased compared with the same period of the previous year amid the shrinking market.





Canon said:


> Within the Imaging System Business Unit, although the market of interchangeable lens digital cameras continued to shrink, for mirrorless cameras, unit sales were strong owing to the successive introduction of new models equipped with full-frame sensors after the second half of the previous year, which served to increase the company’s presence in the market.





Canon said:


> As for interchangeable-lens digital cameras, while demand for interchangeable-lens digital cameras equipped with full-frame sensors is expected to grow steadily, overall market is expected to continue to shrink, centered on entry-class models of single lens reflex cameras.





3kramd5 said:


> Who, car makers? No. They offer certain options in certain models.


And they still let you pick which of those options you want. They generally don't arbitrarily restrict things. Like if you want a red vehicle from Ford you're not forced to buy a F-150 because you can't get red on any other model.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> No matter how many times you post this it's still not going to be true. Somehow you can't seem to comprehend that people want to shoot p24 because they want their footage to look like p24 when they watch it. No matter how many times it's been explained to you continue to insist that p24 is only used or useful in theaters.
> 
> 
> People are voting with their wallets. Canon's camera sales look to be in the start of a death spiral. Their camera sales are down 24.9% in Q2 of 2019 in terms of dollars compared to Q2 of 2018. In terms of number of units it's 22% in ILC's and 17% for other digital cameras Q2/2019 to Q2/2018. They're projecting a loss of 17% and 18% for the year 2019 vs. 2018 for ILC's and other digital cameras respectively. They even admit as much.
> ...


Yeah, I know. And Sony lets you order the internal options you want, a la carte, just like car manufacturers. Only one grip though... The 50 Shades of Grey tribute model. I get it though. Some people enjoy pain.   They don't, but it is only a problem in your mind because... Canon.

BTW: ALL makers are in a spiral... including Sony.

Sony lost market share. Canon gained. Time to put the hinges back on the door. I guess if Oly can survive with less than 2% market share, then Sony can with the under 14% it has. Canon will be fine with 46%.

Sorry dude, you're officially entering troll mode. Can't you upgrade to surroundsounddude? Probably not backwards compatible with the 8 track you are peddling in.


----------



## Architect1776 (Aug 1, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> I'm pretty sure that what Sony users have is a 60 MP body that shoots 10 FPS with the worlds best tracking AF system. What Canon users have is another rumor about some imaginary camera that may or may not ever exist. If you prefer Canon's, dislike Sony, and can live with that it's fine but pretending that Sony isn't leading the way in mirrorless just makes you sound foolish. Just sayin'



Sounds like sour grapes. fell off the resolution peak.


----------



## Architect1776 (Aug 1, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> Out of curiosity, could you, please, give pointers?



Google is your friend.


----------



## melgross (Aug 1, 2019)

WideAngle said:


> Right, my first post here. Been checking and reading a few months, kept my opinions to myself. But by now I'm getting really tired of all of the focus on the RF equipment. I've tested it, worked with it, and it feels like a kids toy. I can't work with it, I won't work with it, I'm not going to switch or invest in any way in RF equipment.
> 
> It would be nice if there would be some sign of acknowledgement that EF is not dead, and that there are still people who want developments in that area. My wish list of EF-related equipment is growing every month, but I've completely stopped investing in it as I'm not going to throw money down the drain.


Good for you, you out of touch person, you.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 1, 2019)

WideAngle said:


> Right, my first post here. Been checking and reading a few months, kept my opinions to myself. But by now I'm getting really tired of all of the focus on the RF equipment. I've tested it, worked with it, and it feels like a kids toy. I can't work with it, I won't work with it, I'm not going to switch or invest in any way in RF equipment.
> 
> It would be nice if there would be some sign of acknowledgement that EF is not dead, and that there are still people who want developments in that area. My wish list of EF-related equipment is growing every month, but I've completely stopped investing in it as I'm not going to throw money down the drain.


The second person who joined CR and immediately panned the R. What a coincidence!


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 1, 2019)

I don’t really understand the gripes, the EF system is a mature system, there isn’t a lot more to add to it and anybody that thinks they can’t take basically any image out there (short of crazy specialization) with the EF system is delusional.

Stop bitching about the most complete and versatile 135 format camera system ever made, you are kidding yourself if you think you need more.

On the other hand the RF system is new, everybody likes a new thing even if it is just so they can say they dont like the new thing! But it is new and its going to take time to fill the system out, but Canon will fill it out.

This reminds me of the late 1980’s where many of us were using FD gear and looking suspiciously at EF gear with the pathetic 1 focus point, horrible manual focus throw on the AF lenses, no backwards compatibility etc etc, worrying about how much further that FD gear would take us, boy the situation is so much better this time. We have backwards compatibility! We have so many options, seriously anybody moaning about what is available today is just doing it to hear themselves moan and get a reaction.


----------



## melgross (Aug 1, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I don’t really understand the gripes, the EF system is a mature system, there isn’t a lot more to add to it and anybody that thinks they can’t take basically any image out there (short of crazy specialization) with the EF system is delusional.
> 
> Stop bitching about the most complete and versatile 135 format camera system ever made, you are kidding yourself if you think you need more.
> 
> ...



That’s pretty much true.

people also look at Sony and think they actually had a mirrorless plan because.., well, they didn’t. Sony went heavily into mirrorless because theY had no more than 5% of the dslr market, and no matter what they did there over the years, they couldn’t break from that. So they looked where no one else was, and decided to try that. With really no competition there, they began to gain momentum.
but now, with Canon and Nikon entering, they’re going to have a much harder time of it.

i See all this criticism of Canon, here and elsewhere. But we really don’t know their plans. We can suspect, but not know. I think Canon will be just fine, or at least, as fine as they can be in an overall market decline, which will likely continue. We just have to hope, that at some point soon, that decline will end, and a decent market will stabilize. if not, then several companies will go belly up as Samsung did several years ago when they left the photo market. Eventually, we could see Nikon leave too, as their sales and marketshare are in serious decl8ne.


----------



## Dantana (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> No, I'm referring to the fact that they won't give quality p24 on their cameras. For example, the R can't shoot 1080p24. The new G series Powershots can't shoot 1080p24 or 2160p24. Canon will only give you p24 as long as the footage has some obvious visual problem with it to keep a serious critical user from using it. So, if the camera has a crazy crop in 4K and bad rolling shutter that makes everything look like jello, sure they'll give you 4Kp24 because the footage is substandard. But if the camera uses the whole sensor (no crop) and doesn't have bad rolling shutter or some other pretty obvious visual flaw (in that resolution) you're not getting p24 So, in the case of the R that means no 1080p24. In other models that means to 1080p24 or 2160p24. After all, Canon has Cx00 cameras to protect. Apparently even from their P&S lineup.
> 
> 
> Wait, you mean they'll sell you the options you want in the body style you want? Crazy... They should be like Canon and make all their models with only one trim level and no options. Take it or leave it. I'm glad you decided to go with this analogy to back your argument.
> ...


I think you are mistaken with the R. Canon lists these two options for 1080p, both with 24 fps:

Full HD 1920 x 1080: 29.97fps/24.00fps/23.98fps/HDR Video, ALL-I: 90Mbps, 654 MB/min.
SD Card: UHS-I, UHS Speed Class 3 or higher 

Full HD 1920 x 1080: 29.97fps/24.00fps/23.98fps/HDR Video, IPB: 30Mbps, 216 MB/min.
SD Card: SD Speed Class 4 or higher 

Perhaps you are thinking of the RP. I would agree that it seems a strange thing to omit from that body, but it does exist in the R.


----------



## sdz (Aug 1, 2019)

melgross said:


> That’s pretty much true.
> 
> people also look at Sony and think they actually had a mirrorless plan because.., well, they didn’t. Sony went heavily into mirrorless because theY had no more than 5% of the dslr market, and no matter what they did there over the years, they couldn’t break from that. So they looked where no one else was, and decided to try that. With really no competition there, they began to gain momentum.
> but now, with Canon and Nikon entering, they’re going to have a much harder time of it.
> ...



Sony also benefits from having Sony Semiconductor developing its sensor technology for the cell phone market. This currently is lucrative and provides Sony Semiconductor with a proving ground for its innovative products. Canon lacks this advantage.

I wonder if Canon could and would partner with Samsung.....


----------



## ashmadux (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> It's not hard to grasp. It's how they do it that draws ire. Did Ford remove the back seat from the Mustang to protect sedan sales? How about keeping the power down on the F150 so that people would have to buy a Mustang if they want to go fast?
> 
> I swear some of you would support Canon even if they made it so their L lenses wouldn't work on their non-pro cameras models saying it's simply a product differentiation thing and the people complaining about such a limitation don't get it.
> 
> ...




This, this this. They actually hobbled the sensor of the RP/6d2 as to not compete with the 5 series. BOTH cameras was on my radar, but I bought neither.

I find that the arguments about 'who needs what' is utter nonsense. They should be added the full amount of features possible into their bodies. The AF capabilities that are now available in modest sony cameras is because they have the tech and it makes their cameras better and easy to use. Period.

_But canon cant seem to think that way_.  Then again, maybe with hobbled video features, *one day never, I'll go and 'upgrade' to their video cameras.*......lololololololololololoololollooloooloool

I'm a canon customer, and they deserve every piece of criticism they get. They can keep their three thousand dollar lenses- I see catalogs being shot with the 24-105 all the time.


----------



## Cochese (Aug 1, 2019)

hendrik-sg said:


> This might mean, that the "next generation" Canon sensor may catch up with the somy sensors from 2011, which by the way should have been in the 5d Mark iii.
> It can easily be, that they mean the pixel count only, payed by a slower readout and even less dynamic range for the benefit of relatively more dead space between the pixels.
> 
> the R-lenses may be fantastic but system efficency is a product of lens and sensor efficency, which means that the weaker Canon sensors easily waste the advantage which would be possible with the better Sony sensors
> ...


The sensor in the 5DMIV caught up to Sony at the time of its release. It's a solid sensor with great dynamic range, it's since lost it's luster in comparison to the newer Sony sensors. 
That being said, most of the working professionals I meet are still using cameras as old as the 5DMII and the 5DMIII. When I photographed an auto show down in Detroit for GM, three of the people I was shooting alongside were using those older 5D cameras. None of them seemed to care a bit about the newer cameras. The other three shooters were me (5DMIV), other guy (Nikon D800), other other guy (Canon 1DX). 

There were other photographers present who were paid for by the dozens of other companies that were there, I didn't even see a single mirrorless amongst them (though, I likely didn't meet all of the photographers, but a few individuals brought their own cameras and at least one of them looked like a Sony as represented by the orange metallic band around the lens). 

In other words, Canon doesn't need to catch up much, they just have to keep up. Pros will use the gear that fits them.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> And they still let you pick which of those options you want. They generally don't arbitrarily restrict things. Like if you want a red vehicle from Ford you're not forced to buy a F-150 because you can't get red on any other model.



Yes, they let you pick from the options they the arbitrarily allow on each model.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 1, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Who, car makers? No. They offer certain options in certain models.


Car analogies do not translate well into cameras because some people on the forum want something capable of towing a fifth wheel trailer, the size of a compact, handling of a Ferrari, mileage of a hybrid, and the price of an economy car.... and because Ford does not offer them a vehicle that does all this, FORD IS *******!


----------



## canonmike (Aug 1, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Bring it on, Canon.


----------



## caffetin (Aug 1, 2019)

canon is coocking something. to sony


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 1, 2019)

tron said:


> An 80 Mpixel camera would a DLA less than f/5.6. EOS 80D has a DLA of f/6.0 and this is equivalent to a 60Mpixel FF camera!
> 
> OK not a problem for fast primes or zooms up to f/5.6. I guess after that it would just gradually (and not always obviously) degrade...



DLA is a misnomer because diffraction is not a hard limit. It is in fact a gradual degradation. The higher resolution sensor will still have the advantage well passed its DLA.


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 1, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> People are voting with their wallets. Canon's camera sales look to be in the start of a death spiral. Their camera sales are down 24.9% in Q2 of 2019 in terms of dollars



Nice sleight of hand there. Unit sales can be up yet revenue down on something as simple as the exchange rate. But if you can get someone to only look at revenue "it's a death spiral."



> In terms of number of units it's 22% in ILC's and 17% for other digital cameras Q2/2019 to Q2/2018.



And now we're going to ignore that *unit shipments for the industry are down 28.6% in ILCs and 19.2% for non-ILC cameras so far for 2019.* Everyone is seeing a unit sales drop, but Canon dropped less than the others thereby increasing their total marketshare. I would agree with you that people are voting with their wallets. They're just not casting their votes according to your narrative.



> They're projecting a loss of 17% and 18% for the year 2019 vs. 2018 for ILC's and other digital cameras respectively. They even admit as much.



So they're planning on beating the industry trend and gaining even more marketshare for the whole year. And this is a *DEATH SPIRAL* 

As always: *CANON. IS. *******!*


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 1, 2019)

AlanF said:


> The second person who joined CR and immediately panned the R. What a coincidence!



Just an FYI to everyone here: paid influencers and bots are real things in the ad industry. In fact, they are much larger than you realize. Not going to accuse a specific account of that without hard evidence, but..."just joined this morning to tell you how much your camera sucks" isn't a good indicator


----------



## melgross (Aug 1, 2019)

sdz said:


> Sony also benefits from having Sony Semiconductor developing its sensor technology for the cell phone market. This currently is lucrative and provides Sony Semiconductor with a proving ground for its innovative products. Canon lacks this advantage.
> 
> I wonder if Canon could and would partner with Samsung.....



Canon could do it, if they wanted to. They are a semiconductor company and produce their own higher end sensors. I suppose they don’t think it’s worthwhile.


----------



## tron (Aug 1, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> DLA is a misnomer because diffraction is not a hard limit. It is in fact a gradual degradation. The higher resolution sensor will still have the advantage well passed its DLA.


Yes that's why I used the word gradually. And anyway it will have big advantage at or below DLA. Now where is my 5DsR II?


----------



## Canon1966 (Aug 1, 2019)

mpb001 said:


> This is why I don’t just jump ship between brands. The industry is constantly evolving. The other reason for me is I like Canon ergonomics, colors and my workflow is down pretty well.


I think Canon has the best ergonomics in the industry, Nikon second... I also think Canon has best articulating screens.


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 1, 2019)

tron said:


> Yes that's why I used the word gradually. And anyway it will have big advantage at or below DLA. Now where is my 5DsR II?



You and me both. When the day comes that I move to Canon's higher resolution sensor, I wouldn't mind having it in an R body AND in a DSLR.


----------



## st jack photography (Aug 1, 2019)

Yep go ahead and reclaim that crown, Canon, but the highest mp means nothing when the sensor is 10 years old, not a BSI, has terrible DR, terrrible AF, crippled despite being capable, a burst speed from 1940s, probably shoot 3 RAW at 2fps before the buffer hangs up, requires an adapter to mount any of my tilt-shift lenses..... Pathetic. RF mount = worst mistake ever. R and Rp = worst full frame bodies on the market
I'll check it out, but as it stands I have never pulled my 5dsr out of the closet for personal art work since I bought a SONY Rx1rm2.

Pretty sure I am done with Canon anyway. All my glass works on Sony just fine, I get all the features I want, and my frustration level is at an all-time low. Guess what, even wifi works with just a button press! With Canon, you have to be a web engineer. Tethering for fast speeds or automated focus stacks with Canon? Um, forget about it. I had to send my 5dsr in 2 x to get the funky USB port changed out. TWICE! Just for regular product tethering. 5DSr is a joke.

Thanks for nothing, Canon. So what, these new M cameras will have an adapter too? An adapter for a aps-c mirrorless? You have got to be kidding! F$*@ Canon.


----------



## tron (Aug 1, 2019)

Oh no, yet another one!


----------



## st jack photography (Aug 1, 2019)

JoeDavid said:


> I am considering the new Sony and a Metabones EF adapter as a higher MP landscape option. I like my Canon R and would love a high MP body for the RF lenses but, with no announcement in sight, how long do you wait? Plus Canon usually “under-preforms” compared to the initial rumors. I will say that the real world RAW files from the R are quite good (similar to the 5DM4 of course). Canon has moved so slowly with sensor tech improvements in the past it is hard to believe that they would make the leap all the way to a FF backside illuminated 80MP sensor. It could be incredible but I’ll believe it when I see it!


Canon making a FF BSI 80? You are joking, right? 
Look, sometimes Canon innovates, and once they even redefined the industry with the EOS EF revolution in 1987, but my advice is this: based solely on what you said, go with the Sony. I speak from experience. I own a LOT of EF L glass, a 5DSr, and all it took was a compact full frame from sony to blow Canon out of the water. My tiny full frame rx1rm2 is shooting with the same sensor as an a7rm2, and it amazed me so much I just couldnt believe it. I went from total Canon fanboy to Canon HATER. Then they promised an elegant native EF solution for full frame mirrorless, but they release the RF which also totally negates the M cameras, and man that pissed me off. All of my L glass feels obsolete now.

Lesson One: When I first began product work, I should have bought a Hasselblad hd3 body and a cheap 50mp CCD sensor back from 10 year ago, would have cost about wht I paid for the 5DSr body. If you want to do product photos, MF is THE ONLY way to go. I should have done that and saved up for a nicer MF sensor. Because now I am stuck with a bunch of obsolete EF glass I dont want any more. My biggest regret is buying into full frame 35mm.
My second regret is choosing Canon.


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 1, 2019)

tron said:


> Oh no, yet another one!



Yep. Just checked his posting history. Nothing but _OMG Canon sucks!_ Why waste time on a Canon forum then?


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 1, 2019)

st jack photography said:


> Yep go ahead and reclaim that crown, Canon, but the highest mp means nothing when the sensor is 10 years old, not a BSI, has terrible DR, terrrible AF, crippled despite being capable, a burst speed from 1940s, probably shoot 3 RAW at 2fps before the buffer hangs up, requires an adapter to mount any of my tilt-shift lenses..... Pathetic. RF mount = worst mistake ever. R and Rp = worst full frame bodies on the market
> I'll check it out, but as it stands I have never pulled my 5dsr out of the closet for personal art work since I bought a SONY Rx1rm2.
> 
> Pretty sure I am done with Canon anyway. All my glass works on Sony just fine, I get all the features I want, and my frustration level is at an all-time low. Guess what, even wifi works with just a button press! With Canon, you have to be a web engineer. Tethering for fast speeds or automated focus stacks with Canon? Um, forget about it. I had to send my 5dsr in 2 x to get the funky USB port changed out. TWICE! Just for regular product tethering. 5DSr is a joke.
> ...


If you are done with canon then why are you here making such long posts desperately seeking validation? Seems kinda sad really.


----------



## hamish (Aug 1, 2019)

st jack photography said:


> Because now I am stuck with a bunch of obsolete EF glass I dont want any more. My biggest regret is buying into full frame 35mm.
> My second regret is choosing Canon.



If you’re serious about not wanting your Canon EF lenses anymore, send them to me. I’ll happily pay postage. DM me and we’ll sort this out. Thanks


----------



## tron (Aug 2, 2019)

So your glass is:

Canon TSE-135 f4 L MACRO; Canon 100mm L IS MACRO; Canon TSE-90mm f2.8 MACRO; Canon 85mm L F1.4 IS; Canon 85mm f1.8 USM; Zeiss 50mm f1.4 PLANAR T ZE(Canon); Canon 50mm f1.2 L; Canon TSE-45mm f2.8; Canon 40mm f2.8 pancake; Canon 35mm f1.4 II L; Canon 24mm f1.4 II L; Canon 15mm FISHEYE;

and you said:

"All my glass works on Sony just fine, I get all the features I want, and my frustration level is at an all-time low"

At the same time you said:

"I am stuck with a bunch of obsolete EF glass I dont want any more. My biggest regret is buying into full frame 35mm."

You Canon haters cannot even stick to a scenario. You should try to not contradict yourselves for a start...

EDIT: As you said the glass works on Sony just fine. By the way it works on RF mount Canon just fine as well...


----------



## Talys (Aug 2, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> If you are done with canon then why are you here making such long posts desperately seeking validation? Seems kinda sad really.


Because the two things that will surely improve one's craft is bitching about Canon, and threatening to buy Sony gear


----------



## sdz (Aug 2, 2019)

melgross said:


> Canon could do it, if they wanted to. They are a semiconductor company and produce their own higher end sensors. I suppose they don’t think it’s worthwhile.



Canon could, but hasn't, so far as I know.


----------



## sdz (Aug 2, 2019)

st jack photography said:


> Canon making a FF BSI 80? You are joking, right?
> Look, sometimes Canon innovates, and once they even redefined the industry with the EOS EF revolution in 1987, but my advice is this: based solely on what you said, go with the Sony. I speak from experience. I own a LOT of EF L glass, a 5DSr, and all it took was a compact full frame from sony to blow Canon out of the water. My tiny full frame rx1rm2 is shooting with the same sensor as an a7rm2, and it amazed me so much I just couldnt believe it. I went from total Canon fanboy to Canon HATER. Then they promised an elegant native EF solution for full frame mirrorless, but they release the RF which also totally negates the M cameras, and man that pissed me off. All of my L glass feels obsolete now.
> 
> Lesson One: When I first began product work, I should have bought a Hasselblad hd3 body and a cheap 50mp CCD sensor back from 10 year ago, would have cost about wht I paid for the 5DSr body. If you want to do product photos, MF is THE ONLY way to go. I should have done that and saved up for a nicer MF sensor. Because now I am stuck with a bunch of obsolete EF glass I dont want any more. My biggest regret is buying into full frame 35mm.
> My second regret is choosing Canon.



And you are sharing your tale with us for what reason?


----------



## bergstrom (Aug 2, 2019)

sony just got 41 or 61 megapixels in the new a7riv and people aren't interested and focusing has been iffy on some test shoots, check out manny's review. so what the hell i would even do with a 80 mp image is beyond me. but since sony failed to offer lower mp for mediaum and smile file formats, i would hope canon wouldn't make the same mistake.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

sdz said:


> And you are sharing your tale with us for what reason?


Because it is the only way some people can get attention. Either that or someone is a paid troll. I am going for the attention seeking option.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 2, 2019)

st jack photography said:


> My second regret is choosing Canon.




Because you’d rather have “obsolete” a mount glass or “obsolete” f mount glass than “obsolete” EF glass?


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 2, 2019)

tron said:


> You Canon haters cannot even stick to a scenario. You should try to not contradict yourselves for a start...
> 
> EDIT: As you said the glass works on Sony just fine. By the way it works on RF mount Canon just fine as well...



Which brings up his other contradiction. EF glass "works fine on Sony" but he hates the RF mount because it "requires an adapter to mount any of my tilt-shift lenses....." So Sony doesn't require an EF adapter?

While we're at it...



st jack photography said:


> Lesson One: When I first began product work, I should have bought a Hasselblad hd3 body and a cheap 50mp CCD sensor back from 10 year ago, would have cost about wht I paid for the 5DSr body.



When were used digital backs around the 50mp range ever cheaper than a new 5Dsr? For a while last year I was flirting with the idea of putting together a used digital MF kit and the cheapest backs I could find in that MP range were STILL more expensive than a brand new 5Ds/sr. That's the back. Not the body, and certainly not a Hasselblad body. On eBay a Leaf Aptus-II 56mp Digital Back for the Mamiya 645AFd recently sold for $3,845. A 40mp one went for $2,800 and even the 28mp ones are going for $2k. These are the kind of prices I ran into last year. (After carefully reviewing some sample files and thinking it through I realized there wouldn't really be any gain over my 5Ds at low ISO and the 5Ds would win at high ISO simply because of the generational differences. The idea of digital MF appealed to me but the reality is that you've got to be reasonably current on the silicon. A 150mp Phase One can certainly put 35mm FF to shame, but not a decade old CCD.)

I gotta ask: are you just throwing stuff out there hoping to make Canon sound bad?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 2, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Which brings up his other contradiction. EF glass "works fine on Sony" but he hates the RF mount because it "requires an adapter to mount any of my tilt-shift lenses....." So Sony doesn't require an EF adapter?
> 
> While we're at it...
> 
> ...



I also thought it was weird to complain that canon is not using BSI CMOS while longing for CCD.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 2, 2019)

Forum logic is at its finest....

This new camera will simultaneously have not enough pixels and too many pixels

Canon is ******* because they have not made a sensor as good as a Sony, yet equally ******* if they make one better than Sony.

These are rumors! A CR1! It means nothing!


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 2, 2019)

Timedog said:


> Nah the touch and drag AF sucks because they didn't add a user customizable sensitivity setting to relative mode, a feature that's basically been in every other mouse-like interface made in the last 30 years.
> 
> If you don't use relative mode it forces you to hold the camera weird.


*Touch control*

You can turn on or off the touch sensitive screen on the back of your Canon EOS R, and adjust sensitivity. Standard/Sensitive/Disable. The setting is not in the relative mode screen, but there is sensitivity adjust: Wrench, 3, second option down. Not as customizable as a mouse, but the thumb isn't moving across a big screen, either. The setting works for when one is in relative mode or in any other. Mine is set on sensitive... which works (for me) far better than standard.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 2, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Which brings up his other contradiction. EF glass "works fine on Sony" but he hates the RF mount because it "requires an adapter to mount any of my tilt-shift lenses....." So Sony doesn't require an EF adapter?[quote\]
> 
> Nor does Sony make a single TS lens. Way behind technologically.  Maybe that's why they have to keep coming to this forum. They believe Sony is the answer, but they must keep coming to Canon to get what they want.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 2, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> *Touch control*
> 
> You can turn on or off the touch sensitive screen on the back of your Canon EOS R, and adjust sensitivity. Standard/Sensitive/Disable. The setting is not in the relative mode screen, but there is sensitivity adjust: Wrench, 3, second option down. Not as customizable as a mouse, but the thumb isn't moving across a big screen, either. The setting works for when one is in relative mode or in any other. Mine is set on sensitive... which works (for me) far better than standard.
> [quote\]
> ...


----------



## Antono Refa (Aug 2, 2019)

max_sr said:


> Nut the number 32.5 is still only a rumor and not neccessarily a technology Canon already has.



Canon has a 120MP APS-H sensor as a commercial product. Same pixel density would make an 80MP APS-C sensor.


----------



## fingerstein (Aug 2, 2019)

I have no doubt that Canon will do their best to make a good photo camera in their "R*" lineup. Even if they'll win the battle with 0.1 Mp more. But video/hybrid shooters will be disappointed again, for sure.


----------



## Quirkz (Aug 2, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I have been looking at quite a few posts from Sony A7Rs + 200-600mm and am shocked at the noise. Looked at these for example: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62942069



Huh. Interesting. Even an iso 800 shot has more noise than I’d have expected. That’s surprising, unless he was pushing the shadows aggressively. And to be fair, from the data, it seems it’s an as7r2.

But you know what struck me as I looked at those shots and your shots above? They’re all stunning, you’re both damn talented, and I’d never have known the difference. It’s the photographer, not the camera spec sheet.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 2, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> Canon has a 120MP APS-H sensor as a commercial product. Same pixel density would make an 80MP APS-C sensor.


Scale the iPhone 12MP sensor up to a 135 format “FF” sensor and you are at 345MP.


----------



## Quirkz (Aug 2, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> Welcome to the Forum!
> 
> I would also like to see something new happen with EF.....
> 
> As to the RF mount, so far we have seen two low end FF cameras. This is not enough to pas judgement on the system yet.



It’s enough to pass judgement. And I judge the RP the best single 1300 purchase I’ve made on photography gear. And I’ve spent a lot over the years on some very expensive gear. Sure, the Sony A7xx might have a better sensor by certain metrics, but it’s not as nice to use, and it’s not 3 times as good, (given the price differential ).

Hell, my 5d4 is not 3x as good. Which is why I hardly use it now. 

I really don’t understand the hate.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 2, 2019)

Quirkz said:


> It’s enough to pass judgement. And I judge the RP the best single 1300 purchase I’ve made on photography gear. And I’ve spent a lot over the years on some very expensive gear. Sure, the Sony A7xx might have a better sensor by certain metrics, but it’s not as nice to use, and it’s not 3 times as good, (given the price differential ).
> 
> Hell, my 5d4 is not 3x as good. Which is why I hardly use it now.
> 
> I really don’t understand the hate.


I don’t understand the hate either.

So far we have seen a pair of low end RF cameras.... essentially the 6D and Rebel of the RF mount. They are good and capable cameras for the price, but just a teaser of what is to come. I expect to see units over the next year or two that will put the 5D and 1D series to shame.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 2, 2019)

Quirkz said:


> Huh. Interesting. Even an iso 800 shot has more noise than I’d have expected. That’s surprising, unless he was pushing the shadows aggressively. And to be fair, from the data, it seems it’s an as7r2.
> 
> But you know what struck me as I looked at those shots and your shots above? They’re all stunning, you’re both damn talented, and I’d never have known the difference. It’s the photographer, not the camera spec sheet.


You can cope with noise if the subject fills most of frame. If you have to crop, then high noise can render an image unacceptable. It’s like many things, a better camera and lens extends the range of what you can do. But, you can still get great shots from lesser gear within its limitations.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

AlanF said:


> You can cope with noise if the subject fills most of frame. If you have to crop, then high noise can render an image unacceptable. It’s like many things, a better camera and lens extends the range of what you can do. But, you can still get great shots from lesser gear within its limitations.


Yep. Cropping is the killer. On the 7d2 with a 600 lens(effective FL of 960mm) I often still have to crop quite extensively. That really tends to highlight any deficiencies.


----------



## tron (Aug 2, 2019)

What is missing from EF is a 600mm DO lens which we know exists as a prototype in f/4 version. Even a 600 f/5.6 DO lens would be perfect!


----------



## tron (Aug 2, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Yep. Cropping is the killer. On the 7d2 with a 600 lens(effective FL of 960mm) I often still have to crop quite extensively. That really tends to highlight any deficiencies.


Still, in good lighting conditions and reasonable ISO (plus denoising) even 100% seems very nice (speaking with 7D2 and 500mm f/4 IS II lens in mind but I guess it's similar and even better with 600mm)..


----------



## zelionprime (Aug 2, 2019)

It’s incredibly sad and funny to see how sour some people here can be regarding those who have “jumped ship” over to Sony. A couple of people here have actually said “they’ll be sorry...” 

*What tha hell*? Calm down. Anyone who went to Sony for the A7RIII or A7III won’t “be sorry” at all when and if Canon releases a mirrorless from camera north of 60MP. Both systems, Canon and Sony are fantastic. And both have great native lenses and solid third party lenses. 

Treating camera brands like religions, gangs or whatever is completely immature at this point. Kudos to shooters who are not brand whores.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

tron said:


> Still, in good lighting conditions and reasonable ISO (plus denoising) even 100% seems very nice (speaking with 7D2 and 500mm f/4 IS II lens in mind but I guess it's similar and even better with 600mm)..


Yeah. I have found that with average sort parameters I can get a 100% crop to hold up as an A3 size print. Maybe even a bit bigger. It won't suffice in poorer conditions though.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 2, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> Yeah. I have found that with average sort parameters I can get a 100% crop to hold up as an A3 size print. Maybe even a bit bigger. It won't suffice in poorer conditions though.


I don’t understand. What percentage of the original image is printed at A3? A 100% crop doesn’t mean anything when put in the context of a paper size, what dpi are you using and what ppi of print are you happy with?

I think an uncropped 135 format sensor prints well to 20”x30” (no real A series equivalent) but generally breaks down at 24”x36” (A1)

Further, if you are cropping there is no point in giving a ‘crop’ cameras “effective focal length” the crop changes that as well as the dof.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I don’t understand. What percentage of the original image is printed at A3? A 100% crop doesn’t mean anything when put in the context of a paper size, what dpi are you using and what ppi of print are you happy with?
> 
> I think an uncropped 135 format sensor prints well to 20”x30” (no real A series equivalent) but generally breaks down at 24”x36” (A1)


Tbh it was sort of a rough estimate when I said 100%. If I crop heavily on the 7d2(often coming out with as little as 6-8mp) on an image that was shot in what I consider avrage conditions I can print to about A3 without being too upset. It won't be perfect but it will be passable. Don't ask me to get too technical though as I just have a crack and see how it turns out. Generally though I will export as a tiff at around 240ppi. Rarely any less. After that I just leave it to the printers.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 2, 2019)

zelionprime said:


> It’s incredibly sad and funny to see how sour some people here can be regarding those who have “jumped ship” over to Sony. A couple of people here have actually said “they’ll be sorry...”
> 
> *What tha hell*? Calm down. Anyone who went to Sony for the A7RIII or A7III won’t “be sorry” at all when and if Canon releases a mirrorless from camera north of 60MP. Both systems, Canon and Sony are fantastic. And both have great native lenses and solid third party lenses.
> 
> Treating camera brands like religions, gangs or whatever is completely immature at this point. Kudos to shooters who are not brand whores.


I think you misunderstand. We are not sour about those who have switched to Sony. We just wish they would shut the [email protected]#k up about it and stop trolling this forum. This constant repetition of the same tired BS is not discussion. It is a sad attempt to either influence others or somehow ganar validation for their decisions. In other words. Bots, trools or very lonely unpopular people.


----------



## tron (Aug 2, 2019)

kraats said:


> Your frustration level is still very high, eventhough you have a Sony.


Isn't it amazing how many contradictions are in a sigle post?

I am thinking of creating a Poll:

st jack photography:

1. Paid troll ?
2. Disturbed ?
3. Hobby troll ?
4. Just Canon hater/Sony lover ? (but still disturbed)


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 2, 2019)

Woody said:


> The new sensor technology part sounds consistent with what Thom Hogan reported:
> "Meanwhile, Canon supposedly is hard at work on a complete redo of their sensor lineup, but we’ve yet to see what that means. The M, R, and RP use older DSLR sensors; Canon’s next technology doesn’t yet exist in a camera, though I’m pretty sure it’s still progressing for deployment soon."
> - http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews...mber-2019-mirrorl/the-full-frame-game-is.html
> 
> Curious what this means...


They really need to do that, they also should switch to backlit sensor technology. Personally, I am not one of those always complaining about DR etc., because I prefer classic photography light settings. But Canon certainly needs to catch up with Sony's now leading sensor tech if they want to keep their own sensor lines alive. We users would really profit if Canon would be really competitive again and prevent the market from being totally dominated by Sony. Even Hasselblads and Fuji's (small) medium format sensors are made by Sony, because there is no alternative. That's not what economists call a healthy market.


----------



## bf (Aug 2, 2019)

So the megapixel race is about to re-start again? I never cared, as I'm not a user for such sensors. I need a well-rounded camera instead.


----------



## Geek (Aug 2, 2019)

st jack photography said:


> Canon making a FF BSI 80? You are joking, right?
> Look, sometimes Canon innovates, and once they even redefined the industry with the EOS EF revolution in 1987, but my advice is this: based solely on what you said, go with the Sony. I speak from experience. I own a LOT of EF L glass, a 5DSr, and all it took was a compact full frame from sony to blow Canon out of the water. My tiny full frame rx1rm2 is shooting with the same sensor as an a7rm2, and it amazed me so much I just couldnt believe it. I went from total Canon fanboy to Canon HATER. Then they promised an elegant native EF solution for full frame mirrorless, but they release the RF which also totally negates the M cameras, and man that pissed me off. All of my L glass feels obsolete now.
> 
> Lesson One: When I first began product work, I should have bought a Hasselblad hd3 body and a cheap 50mp CCD sensor back from 10 year ago, would have cost about wht I paid for the 5DSr body. If you want to do product photos, MF is THE ONLY way to go. I should have done that and saved up for a nicer MF sensor. Because now I am stuck with a bunch of obsolete EF glass I dont want any more. My biggest regret is buying into full frame 35mm.
> My second regret is choosing Canon.



Please give me a shout. I'll be more than happy to take the "obsolete EF L glass" off your hands.....


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 2, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I thought we all despised spec wars?


Well, the *St*rategic *A*rms *R*eduction *T*reaty contract of the camera industry has come to its end, obviously


----------



## Pape (Aug 2, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> Well, the *St*rategic *A*rms *R*eduction *T*reaty contract of the camera industry has come to its end, obviously


Maybe 64mpixel samsung sensor made them scared enough


----------



## amorse (Aug 2, 2019)

Aussie shooter said:


> I think you misunderstand. We are not sour about those who have switched to Sony. We just wish they would shut the [email protected]#k up about it and stop trolling this forum. This constant repetition of the same tired BS is not discussion. It is a sad attempt to either influence others or somehow ganar validation for their decisions. In other words. Bots, trools or very lonely unpopular people.


The whole trolling discussion is a tough one. I think it's hard to assign motive to those coming here with those comments we've seen before - they could be trolling, or looking for validation, or seeking solutions, or just repeating the perspectives they've seen on other forums to engage in conversation. I'm not sure we can always be sure of the objective behind their comments as I do think some come off as trolling but are in reality just repeating what they've heard elsewhere rather than assessing their current needs against the offerings. 

For me, I try not to get too worked up about it - whether they believe what they're saying or not, the answer is the same: if you're not getting what you need from your current gear, then switch to what works for you - everything's vapourware until you can buy it, the high-resolution R included. With comment chains of 11 pages like this thread, I think people coming here from a link on some other photography website are unlikely to see if their tired trope has been said already and are more likely to repeat the mantra unknowingly. I figure it is just easier to say "buy what best serves your need best now, that's what most people on this forum are doing"


----------



## Architect1776 (Aug 2, 2019)

Pape said:


> Maybe 64mpixel samsung sensor made them scared enough



I doubt it seeing as they have made and demonstrated a 250 mp sensor that could be used anytime they want.


----------



## Architect1776 (Aug 2, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> Canon has a 120MP APS-H sensor as a commercial product. Same pixel density would make an 80MP APS-C sensor.



And also a 250 mp sensor as well that they have demonstrated.


----------



## Pape (Aug 2, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I doubt it seeing as they have made and demonstrated a 250 mp sensor that could be used anytime they want.


I thought we were talking about sony


----------



## Neutral (Aug 2, 2019)

Would be interesting if Canon could come up with 100mpx camera using own up-to-date sensor technology on par with the Sony latest line of new generation sensors. This could help keep the market very competitive to the benefits of users of any brand, be this Canon, Sony, Nikon or L-mount alliance.
Now we have Sony a7rIV with new generation 61mpx sensor, new quad pixel IMX521CQR (supposedly planned for Sony a7sIII ) which is having extreemly high sensitivity and extremely high well saturation point, embedded different HDR modes also avalable in movie modes, different readout modes from 15mpx for video up to 61mpx for stills, 12/14/16 bits readout, anti-blooming pixel design and finally extreemly interesting rumoured IMX555cqr 102mpx sensor, possibly we will see it first in Nikon Z8 or Z9 as it did not appeared in Sony a7rIV, some people hope to see it in possible high end Sony a9r, not sure if this happens any time soon.

Would be nice if Canon launched 100mpx sensor camera using own sensor which is on par with upcoming Sony 102mpx IMX555CQR to keep market highly competitive, otherwise Nikon or Sony might give hard blow to Canon in high mpx camera area with new Z9 or a9r using IMX555CQR. Just launch them shortly after Canon announcement of Canon high mpx camera.
Next 12 month from now could be very interesting.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 2, 2019)

tron said:


> Isn't it amazing how many contradictions are in a sigle post?
> 
> I am thinking of creating a Poll:
> 
> ...


I think the sainthood thing might be a little overstated.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 2, 2019)

st jack photography said:


> Yep go ahead and reclaim that crown, Canon, but the highest mp means nothing when the sensor is 10 years old, not a BSI, has terrible DR, terrrible AF, crippled despite being capable, a burst speed from 1940s, probably shoot 3 RAW at 2fps before the buffer hangs up, requires an adapter to mount any of my tilt-shift lenses..... Pathetic. RF mount = worst mistake ever. R and Rp = worst full frame bodies on the market
> I'll check it out, but as it stands I have never pulled my 5dsr out of the closet for personal art work since I bought a SONY Rx1rm2.
> 
> Pretty sure I am done with Canon anyway. All my glass works on Sony just fine, I get all the features I want, and my frustration level is at an all-time low. Guess what, even wifi works with just a button press! With Canon, you have to be a web engineer. Tethering for fast speeds or automated focus stacks with Canon? Um, forget about it. I had to send my 5dsr in 2 x to get the funky USB port changed out. TWICE! Just for regular product tethering. 5DSr is a joke.
> ...


Bye. Please don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.


----------



## tron (Aug 2, 2019)

Geek said:


> Please give me a shout. I'll be more than happy to take the "obsolete EF L glass" off your hands.....


Me too  

Especially these "obsolete" Tilt and Shift lenses!


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 2, 2019)

Pape said:


> Maybe 64mpixel samsung sensor made them scared enough


There is always a bad guy and a red button


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 2, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I doubt it seeing as they have made and demonstrated a 250 mp sensor that could be used anytime they want.


Erm, I don't dare to write this, but my wife still uses 12 MP Nikons, and she makes A3 prints in which you can see every fine hair. Henry Cartier Bresson once said to the younger Helmut Newton: "sharpness is just a bourgeois concept!" Maybe, today, he'd say "many megapixels are just a bourgeois concept" ...


----------



## Cryhavoc (Aug 2, 2019)

Timedog said:


> Nah the touch and drag AF sucks because they didn't add a user customizable sensitivity setting to relative mode, a feature that's basically been in every other mouse-like interface made in the last 30 years.
> 
> If you don't use relative mode it forces you to hold the camera weird.


well I guess if there is a fault, someone will complain about it.
btw, I don't recall a sensitivity adjustment method for the mechanical joysticks.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 2, 2019)

amorse said:


> The whole trolling discussion is a tough one.


The nice thing about trolling today is that it is digital and will be lost soon. From mesopotamia some troll commentaries on clay tablets have survived for more than four thousands of years! So, the longterm impact of trolling is declining, which is a comforting realization.


----------



## Mike27713 (Aug 2, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Canon can stick their Mirrorless cameras up their Cannon! I will always avoid mirrorless. I don't wanna compose on a TV screen! I have been waiting for several years for Canon to come out with a 5Dsr2. Money has long been in my pocket for it. Maybe I can find another manufacturer that will do a high megapixel DSLR and sell off my Canon equipment. I've been a Canon customer for many decades. If I wanted a large point and shoot, I would have bought one a long time ago!


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Aug 2, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Bye. Please don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out.



Well said!


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Aug 2, 2019)

Mike27713 said:


> Canon can stick their Mirrorless cameras up their Cannon! I will always avoid mirrorless. I don't wanna compose on a TV screen! I have been waiting for several years for Canon to come out with a 5Dsr2. Money has long been in my pocket for it. Maybe I can find another manufacturer that will do a high megapixel DSLR and sell off my Canon equipment. I've been a Canon customer for many decades. If I wanted a large point and shoot, I bwould have bought one a long time ago!


Even though canons new high megapixel R camera will give you vastly better image quality than you’ve ever experienced before?

What phone do you use? A Nokia 3310? 

Get with the times.


----------



## C Tographer (Aug 2, 2019)

I don't want more megapixels. I want less.

I want low-light ability and increased dynamic range rather than more megapixels.


----------



## PGSanta (Aug 2, 2019)

C Tographer said:


> I don't want more megapixels. I want less.
> 
> I want low-light ability and increased dynamic range rather than more megapixels.



Cool. And I want more MP. Canon will probably address both desires, it just so happens that the rumor is the next R body up will be high res.


----------



## Dantana (Aug 2, 2019)

C Tographer said:


> I don't want more megapixels. I want less.
> 
> I want low-light ability and increased dynamic range rather than more megapixels.


Then, I'm guessing this won't be your next camera.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Aug 2, 2019)

C Tographer said:


> I don't want more megapixels. I want less.
> 
> I want low-light ability and increased dynamic range rather than more megapixels.


...just because Canon are releasing a high MP model doesn’t mean they won’t release a camera with a more “normal” pixel count. We’re talking about the 3rd ever R camera made. There’ll be plenty more models over the next few years.


----------



## windsorc (Aug 2, 2019)

BillB said:


> Don't worry. Sony fanboys will always be able to come up with magic numbers for us to despise.


Canon fanboys will always be able to harp on about how ergonomics and Canon colors are the most important things, sensors hardly seem to matter to Canon users, at least that is what Canon fans have been saying for years.


----------



## mpb001 (Aug 2, 2019)

C Tographer said:


> I don't want more megapixels. I want less.
> 
> I want low-light ability and increased dynamic range rather than more megapixels.


I agree with you on the MP. Most people do not want or need more MP. Cleaner, images with a good low noise sensor with high DR is perfect for me. I use a 5DIV and that pixel count is about right for me. I say they need to continue to upgrade sensors in that MP range of around 30 - 36 MP.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 3, 2019)

windsorc said:


> Canon fanboys will always be able to harp on about how ergonomics and Canon colors are the most important things, sensors hardly seem to matter to Canon users, at least that is what Canon fans have been saying for years.


Sensors hardly seem to matter to* the majority of camera buyers*, at least that is what the *global market share data* have been saying for years.

Or more correctly, the differences between Canon’s sensors and their competitors’ are irrelevant as far as most camera buyers are concerned. 

I’m sure that’s what you were trying to say, you just got confused.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 3, 2019)

Jasonmc89 said:


> ...just because Canon are releasing a high MP model doesn’t mean they won’t release a camera with a more “normal” pixel count. We’re talking about the 3rd ever R camera made. There’ll be plenty more models over the next few years.



Didn’t they already release “normal” MP models?


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 3, 2019)

C Tographer said:


> I don't want more megapixels. I want less.
> 
> I want low-light ability and increased dynamic range rather than more megapixels.



Those are not mutually exclusive things.


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 3, 2019)

windsorc said:


> Canon fanboys will always be able to harp on about how ergonomics and Canon colors are the most important things, sensors hardly seem to matter to Canon users, at least that is what Canon fans have been saying for years.



Sensors matter. A virtually invisible difference in one metric (DR) does not matter.


----------



## PGSanta (Aug 3, 2019)

windsorc said:


> Canon fanboys will always be able to harp on about how ergonomics and Canon colors are the most important things, sensors hardly seem to matter to Canon users, at least that is what Canon fans have been saying for years.



Sony is making sensors with better specs right now. They are using sensors fresh off an R&D cycle, and they are killing it. 

Good for Sony. Good for consumers. Good for the industry. 

The thing is, while I’ll acknowledge that Sony is making better sensors, the degree to which they are better doesn’t outweigh all the cons of using a Sony vs an R... FOR ME; if it does for you, that’s cool. I don’t think you’re wrong. 

All of that said, you'd be really, really short sighted not to see that Canon probably has some sensors in the pipeline that are significantly better than the mature products they offer now. 

Will they release a line that competes with Sony? Will they be content to be slightly behind? Will they release something truly innovative?

Who knows. I would not be shocked if their next series of sensors beat out what Sony is offering. I also wouldn’t be shocked if they were slightly behind. So long as it doesn’t mean a huge difference in the images I can capture, and Sony continues to be weak in the areas they are weak in... I’ll be using a Canon. 

There are a lot of people like me. You shouldn’t get upset about it; it doesn’t affect what you choose to buy or how you shoot.


----------



## M. D. Vaden of Oregon (Aug 3, 2019)

windsorc said:


> Canon fanboys will always be able to harp on about how ergonomics and Canon colors are the most important things, sensors hardly seem to matter to Canon users, at least that is what Canon fans have been saying for years.



Hard to say what anybody has been saying for years..

For me, I find the way Canon's new RF shuts out dust when changing lenses a brilliant piece of design work and very practical. The extra control ring is very nice to use too, for extra versatility. Much of the previous gear works very good too, and I've earned some fairly good extra income with it.

Got anything else you would like to harp on about?


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 3, 2019)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Does it have a reversing camera?



It has a full 360 view actually all angles. Forward, Back and Side. But the dynamic range sucks, at night with the red backup lights on you can see nothing. Ford hasn't caught up to Sony.

I am so mad at Ford I may start driving a Sony.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

JoFT said:


> Wow!! this sounds like music in my ears....
> 
> Looking at the lenses Canon is releasing for the R-mounts this makes totally sense. I predict all the guys changing to Sony in these days will have regrets in the future.....



I predict most Sony fanboys will stubbornly cling to the idea that whatever Sony does is superior to whatever Canon does. They'll do this because apparently their entire concept of self is based upon the gear they:

a) own

or

b) want but have never actually held

being superior in every conceivable way to any other gear from another manufacturer.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

sdz said:


> Removing 1080/24 was an insult to Canon customers even if they had no use for it



I wasn't insulted by it at all. I've been a Canon customer since the 1990s.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

Eersel said:


> What if I told you megapixels wasn't the most important spec of them all?



You would be far from the first to say such things.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 3, 2019)

JoFT said:


> I predict all the guys changing to Sony in these days will have regrets in the future.....



People who chase greener grass are often disappointed.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Aug 3, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Didn’t they already release “normal” MP models?


A couple of them yes!


----------



## PGSanta (Aug 3, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sensors hardly seem to matter to* the majority of camera buyers*, at least that is what the *global market share data* have been saying for years.
> 
> Or more correctly, the differences between Canon’s sensors and their competitors’ are irrelevant as far as most camera buyers are concerned.
> 
> I’m sure that’s what you were trying to say, you just got confused.



The mental gymnastics you go through to support a position on these boards...


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 3, 2019)

windsorc said:


> Canon fanboys will always be able to harp on about how ergonomics and Canon colors are the most important things, sensors hardly seem to matter to Canon users, at least that is what Canon fans have been saying for years.



Ask yourself the following questions: what is my compelling reason for coming around this place again and again, and leaving non sensual remarks about subjects I have no idea about? Should I stop being an embarrassment and move along to a Sony centred forums where I will be surrounded by like minded individuals?


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 3, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> The mental gymnastics you go through to support a position on these boards...


no this is a reality of a digital photography. this is all about photography, you know. photographs.
an art of capturing light, composition, colours, expression, storytelling and emotionally compelling imagery.

I do not give a flying duck about SONY technology drievel. I need Canon colour magic, reliability and ergonomics. the rest is a photographer's job.
I can shoot with a single AF point ,. I don't mind. the bottom line is: RAW files that are coming out of Canon 5D IV are amazing.

Majority of SONY superiority rethorics have nothing to do with Photography at all.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 3, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> The mental gymnastics you go through to support a position on these boards...


I suppose some people find established facts and simple logic so intellectually taxing that they would term them ‘mental gymnastics’. Personally, I think that’s sad.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Plenty to like about Canon and plenty to dislike about Sony but if you can't appreciate the extent to which Sony is driving camera tech forward I don't know what to tell you. Canon is the world's largest camera company with decades of experience and for the most part they have been chasing Sony's tail for the last several years. It's a little sad.
> 
> Canon's cameras, like pretty much every camera made in the last decade or so, still produce fine images but the tech gap is widening every day. I understand why that gets on some peoples nerves but it's not Sony's fault that Canon isn't keeping up.



Tell me again about when Sony passed Canon in terms of total ILC sales and ILC market share. I seem to have missed that announcement.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> It's not hard to grasp. It's how they do it that draws ire. Did Ford remove the back seat from the Mustang to protect sedan sales? How about keeping the power down on the F150 so that people would have to buy a Mustang if they want to go fast?
> 
> I swear some of you would support Canon even if they made it so their L lenses wouldn't work on their non-pro cameras models saying it's simply a product differentiation thing and the people complaining about such a limitation don't get it.
> 
> ...




Yeah, Canon didn't put a 65 point (all cross-type) AF system in its APS-C 7D Mark II at the same time their flagship 1D X and Pro FF 5D Mark III only had 61 point AF (with not all of them cross-type).

Canon also never introduces new features in lower level cameras before giving them to the top tier models, like when they put flicker reduction (a BIG thing for sports shooters who work under flickering artificial lights in high school and small/medium sized college stadiums and gyms) in the 7D Mark II in 2014 before the Rebel T6i/750D got it in 2015, then the 1D X Mark II (2016) and the 5D Mark IV (2016)...

Oh, wait...


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> They would never put features or tech borrowed directly from their top end cameras in a P&S. Heck Canon won't even put their top end metering or AF in a 2nd tier camera.



Yeah, none of the rebels have RGB+IR full color light meters like the 5D Mark IV (2016), the 1D X (2012), the 1D X Mark II (2016), and the 7D Mark II (2014).

Well... except for the Rebel T6i/750D (2015), the Rebel T6s/760D (2015), the Rebel T7i/800D (2017), In addition to the mid-grade 80D (2016) and 77D (2017).


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Below, when speaking about the RP.
> 
> 
> So I don't know what your experience was, but it wasn't set correctly. I weigh 300 lbs (fat cheeks) and have a big fat nose. No problem at all. If I set the camera for right side and use my left eye, yeah, problems exactly like you experienced. Not set correctly.
> ...



You're confusing him with facts, man!


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

tron said:


> An 80 Mpixel camera would a DLA less than f/5.6. EOS 80D has a DLA of f/6.0 and this is equivalent to a 60Mpixel FF camera!
> 
> OK not a problem for fast primes or zooms up to f/5.6. I guess after that it would just gradually (and not always obviously) degrade and we can always have an equivalent of a very sharp less Mpixel camera so no actual loss just a gain on good lighting conditions.



DLA only begins to affect image sharpness when viewing at 100% (one image pixel = one screen pixel) on a monitor for which the viewer can discriminate a single pixel from adjacent pixels. For an 80 MP 3:2 image viewed on a 96 ppi monitor, that would be the equivalent of looking at a piece of a 115 x 76 inch image from less than one foot away! One can use apertures well past the DLA before it begins to perceptibly affect an image viewed under standard conditions.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

Stereodude said:


> And they still let you pick which of those options you want. They generally don't arbitrarily restrict things. Like if you want a red vehicle from Ford you're not forced to buy a F-150 because you can't get red on any other model.



Go into a Ford dealer and try to buy an F-150 with some, but not all, of the options offered in a specific trim level. Let us know what happens.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 3, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Which brings up his other contradiction. EF glass "works fine on Sony" but he hates the RF mount because it "requires an adapter to mount any of my tilt-shift lenses....." So Sony doesn't require an EF adapter?
> 
> While we're at it...
> 
> ...



For product photography I suppose one could use a digital scanning back. But then one would need to spend a small fortune on very high quality (flickerless) continuous lighting.


----------



## sdz (Aug 3, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> I wasn't insulted by it at all. I've been a Canon customer since the 1990s.


You should have felt insulted. That you were unaware of or unconcerned about this insult does not alter the fact that it was an insult. If someone were to call you a dirty ~$?!*!%+×@ to your face and if you were not bothered by that fact, we would rightly say that you were insulted and also that you took the insult in stride. The act determines the characteristics attributed to it, not the feelings of the target.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 3, 2019)

sdz said:


> You should have felt insulted. That you were unaware of or unconcerned about this insult does not alter the fact that it was an insult. If someone were to call you a dirty ~$?!*!%+×@ to your face and if you were not bothered by that fact, we would rightly say that you were insulted and also that you took the insult in stride. The act determines the characteristics attributed to it, not the feelings of the target.


So according to you, I should feel insulted that Subaru didn’t include a laser printer in my Outback? LOL. 

Perhaps you want to sleep with 1080p24 video as a snuggly toy after kissing it goodnight, but you need to accept the fact that many people simply don’t give a damn about it.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 3, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> So according to you, I should feel insulted that Subaru didn’t include a laser printer in my Outback? LOL.
> 
> Perhaps you want to sleep with 1080p24 video as a snuggly toy after kissing it goodnight, but you need to accept the fact that many people simply don’t give a damn about it.


Maybe it was a micro aggression?


----------



## PGSanta (Aug 3, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> I suppose some people find established facts and simple logic so intellectually taxing that they would term them ‘mental gymnastics’. Personally, I think that’s sad.



Let's examine what you think "simple logic", and "established facts" are.

First you claim "Sensors hardly seem to matter to the majority of camera buyers, at least that is what the global market share data have been saying for years."

So, you're claiming that Sensors don't matter to camera buyers, because the majority of cameras sold use overwhelmingly lower quality (smaller, inferior, low end, however you want to frame it) sensors. In your mind, this is an established fact, when in reality something like... oh I don't know, price might be a more significant driving force in camera purchases than anything else, but that sensor quality might still be very important. The mere fact that most cameras sold use lower quality sensors does not equate to any consumer stance on sensors at all. 

Then you let off this gem: "Or more correctly, the differences between Canon’s sensors and their competitors’ are irrelevant as far as most camera buyers are concerned."

Which, logically, is just as stupid a conclusion as your first statement. 

Either you're a troll designed to generate more postings here via conflict, or you're a complete clown. Either way, I'll just ignore your babble from here on out.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 3, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> Let's examine what you think "simple logic", and "established facts" are.
> 
> First you claim "Sensors hardly seem to matter to the majority of camera buyers, at least that is what the global market share data have been saying for years."
> 
> ...


I guess I used words that were too big for you, or concepts that were too complex, sorry. 

You should definitely ignore my posts, and anything else you’re unable to comprehend. Be the ostrich!


----------



## Architect1776 (Aug 3, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> Erm, I don't dare to write this, but my wife still uses 12 MP Nikons, and she makes A3 prints in which you can see every fine hair. Henry Cartier Bresson once said to the younger Helmut Newton: "sharpness is just a bourgeois concept!" Maybe, today, he'd say "many megapixels are just a bourgeois concept" ...



I still use my 10D, 6mp Camera.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 3, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> DLA only begins to affect image sharpness when viewing at 100% (one image pixel = one screen pixel) on a monitor for which the viewer can discriminate a single pixel from adjacent pixels. For an 80 MP 3:2 image viewed on a 96 ppi monitor, that would be the equivalent of looking at a piece of a 115 x 76 inch image from less than one foot away! One can use apertures well past the DLA before it begins to perceptibly affect an image viewed under standard conditions.


Michael
Unfortunately, many of us birders are in that territory of verging on pixelation, just taking the centre 1500x1500 px or fewer. If I can get a 1000 px in length on a bird, I can usually get a good enough detailed image. But, I get what you mean.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 3, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I still use my 10D, 6mp Camera.


I made very nice pictures with a 4MP camera in 2002. A picture I took with it of the Grand Pacific Glacier is printed on 13" x 19" paper is framed and hanging on my wall. It looks great when viewed from a normal distance of 1.5 to 2 feet.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 3, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> You're confusing him with facts, man!


He edited out the part where he says he already bought the Sony A7 RII, before commenting on the RP.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 3, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sensors hardly seem to matter to* the majority of camera buyers*, at least that is what the *global market share data* have been saying for years.



I guess global market share data matter even less to the camera buyers.

Personally I don't care about the market share data and about what the majority of other buyers think about sensor specs. Sensor specs - I do care about.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 3, 2019)

stevelee said:


> I made very nice pictures with a 4MP camera in 2002. A picture I took with it of the Grand Pacific Glacier is printed on 13" x 19" paper is framed and hanging on my wall. It looks great when viewed from a normal distance of 1.5 to 2 feet.


I took some great photos of my daughters wedding in 1998 with an Agfa ePhoto 1280, which had a 0.8 mpx sensor uprezzed to 1.3 mpx by their software.


----------



## BillB (Aug 3, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> DLA only begins to affect image sharpness when viewing at 100% (one image pixel = one screen pixel) on a monitor for which the viewer can discriminate a single pixel from adjacent pixels. For an 80 MP 3:2 image viewed on a 96 ppi monitor, that would be the equivalent of looking at a piece of a 115 x 76 inch image from less than one foot away! One can use apertures well past the DLA before it begins to perceptibly affect an image viewed under standard conditions.



In any case, the same lens is at the same aperture is going to produce sharper images of equal size using a higher mp sensor than it will using a lower mp sensor of equal quality. DLA never completely cancels out the effect of the additional pixels, or at so I understand.


----------



## BillB (Aug 3, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I guess global market share data matter even less to the camera buyers.
> 
> Personally I don't care about the market share data and about what the majority of other buyers think about sensor specs. Sensor specs - I do care about.


That's fine. If sensor specs float your boat, go for it. For other buyers, the question is whether the differences in sensor specs make any practical difference.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> So according to you, I should feel insulted that Subaru didn’t include a laser printer in my Outback? LOL.
> 
> Perhaps you want to sleep with 1080p24 video as a snuggly toy after kissing it goodnight, but you need to accept the fact that many people simply don’t give a damn about it.



no, but you should feel insulted if your car maker hurried the window washer box in the engine bay.

You seem to think you are clever....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I guess global market share data matter even less to the camera buyers.
> 
> Personally I don't care about the market share data and about what the majority of other buyers think about sensor specs. Sensor specs - I do care about.


Of course buyers don’t care about market share. But they do *determine* market share, in aggregate. Thus, their aggregate buying decisions give some insight into their priorities. Those insights are far more informative than anecdotes about what one person wants or what ‘all their friends’ are buying.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> no, but you should feel insulted if your car maker hurried the window washer box in the engine bay.
> 
> You seem to think you are clever....


Just realistic. Sorry, you don’t get to decide what is insulting, for anyone except yourself. Grow up.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Of course buyers don’t care about market share. But they do *determine* market share, in aggregate. Thus, their aggregate buying decisions give some insight into their priorities. Those insights are far more informative than anecdotes about what one person wants or what ‘all their friends’ are buying.


True. But how should this insight affect *my* buying decisions? Or anyone else's individual buying decisions?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 4, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> True. But how should this insight affect *my* buying decisions? Or anyone else's individual buying decisions?



It shouldn’t. Nor does it. That information is useful to someone analyzing the market, it not someone buying a product.

*edit:
Typo corrected


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 4, 2019)

BillB said:


> That's fine. If sensor specs float your boat, go for it. For other buyers, the question is whether the differences in sensor specs make any practical difference.


But again I don't care about other buyers on average. Some of them are definitely concerned about DR, Mp count, high ISO performance etc, myself included. Whether they make the majority of buyers or not - I don't care at all.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 4, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> It shouldn’t. Nor does it. That information is useful to someone analyzing the market, it someone buying a product.



Why do i need to analyse the market (i.e. global sales, market share, profit) before buying a product? I may be concerned about my brand to not collapse completely, but apart from that, how exactly should I use the global market share information?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 4, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Why do i need to analyse the market (i.e. global sales, market share, profit) before buying a product?


You don’t. Vendors do.

The reason it came up is that someone made a statement about what matters to buyers, and trends reflect that directly.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> True. But how should this insight affect *my* buying decisions? Or anyone else's individual buying decisions?


As @3kramd5 stated, it shouldn’t. But when someone makes claims that Canon ‘must keep up with Sony’s sensors’ or ‘Canon is in trouble because everyone is switching brands to get p24 video in their ILCs’, those claims are shown to be false by the market share data.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Of course buyers don’t care about market share. But they do *determine* market share, in aggregate. Thus, their aggregate buying decisions give some insight into their priorities. Those insights are far more informative than anecdotes about what one person wants or what ‘all their friends’ are buying.


WOW! Next thing you know, you will be trying to tell us that the Canon marketing department, with access to sales records and future products, knows more about buying patterns than some random person on the internet! inconceivable!


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> As @3kramd5 stated, it shouldn’t. But when someone makes claims that Canon ‘must keep up with Sony’s sensors’ or ‘Canon is in trouble because everyone is switching brands to get p24 video in their ILCs’, those claims are shown to be false by the market share data.



Ok. Whether or not Canon is in trouble as a business I don't know. Maybe those claims you mentioned are false. But so are the claims that the DR improvements won't affect anything. The sensor tech is what will affect my _personal_ buying decisions.

As a buyer I'd like to upgrade from 5DIV. My glass will be the same so the sensor is what matters the most. So if Canon doesn't deliver in a few months, or delivers something significantly worse than Sony A7rIV, I'll just switch to Sony with an EF adapter.
But I'll look carefully because A7rIV looks a bit disappointing, I expected a 16 bit sensor from them. Should it have a 16 bit sensor, I'd be preordering right now.


----------



## Besisika (Aug 4, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I'd like to know what you are photographing and how you are using those photographs that makes you so much more picky than others. The only thing I can think of is massive, billboard-sized prints that are displayed in locations where the viewers can actually walk right up and look at the images from a foot away. Are you Andreas Gursky?


Hard to argue with what you just said, because it totally makes sense. The bad thing about knowing the truth is that you stick to it, not wanting to find other truths.
Your opinion reminds me of the conversation 5 or 6 years ago. "Nobody has 4K TV and there is no advantage of having a 4K TV unless you watch and sit 1m away from it". Yet today, every new camera "must have" a 4K. Canon made a mistake listening to that kind of truth, will they make the same thing again with IBIS and megapixel race?
The idea behind innovation is so that people can find a new way of using a gear. Sorry if I do not share with you my ideas, at least not yet. It is not nice of me to behave that way, but allow me to do so.
My attitude toward photography is simple: "how can I stand out if I shoot like everybody else?". I hate repeating what a billion on our planet is doing. I want to do something else.
Maybe, I do not want to use a tripod on location because of security and other restrictions. Maybe, don't want to shoot tight any longer. Maybe, I don't want to be bound by framing properly rule any longer. Maybe, I found a way to shoot close ups the same way as full body shots. Maybe, I don't want to shoot at 1.4 indoors any longer. Maybe, I want on-location shots to look like in-studio shots. There is so much "maybe" that you could explore, then why stick to the way of your grandpa?
I hated shooting in mixed temperature lighting, until I discovered the work of Jake Hicks. The dude found his style in mixing colored light. That is the inspiration I need from others, not the ones who try to convince me that everything has been discovered.
I hope that shines a light on my arrogant attitude not to share with you what I shoot. Believe it or not but I do not want to be Andreas Gursky.
I am a firm believer that camera sales do not depend on the truth. It depends on what people believe to be the truth. 
If I am convinced of the advantage of having IBIS when shooting a higher megapixel on-location, there are possibly others as well. The only question is how many?


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> _Of course buyers don’t care about market share. _[emphasis added] But they do *determine* market share, in aggregate. Thus, their aggregate buying decisions give some insight into their priorities. Those insights are far more informative than anecdotes about what one person wants or what ‘all their friends’ are buying.



So, you believe consumers do not care about market share. Yet, if, say, Pentax were to flounder and its struggles were known by consumers, they would ignore that information when making their camera purchase decisions. They would ignore the fact that a dead company will not service its products, provide updates, fail to provide an upgrade path, etc.

Yeah, you're a realist.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> You are hardly a realist. And I, along with everyone else, do get to decide what is and is not insulting.


You are insulting me by your claims that you are in the position to decide what _must_ insult me. Please avoid making such claims in future.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

Kit. said:


> You are insulting me by your claims that you are in the position to decide what _must_ insult me. Please avoid making such claims in future.


I'll not do that.

Nice try, though. Everyone decides through usage the meaning of the words and phrases we use. Redin is hard, isn't it?


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> that was hardly a socially acceptable statement if at all.
> do you mind watching you language, please?



Why should I watch my language? If I must contend with trolls following me around, I'll reply to them using words and phrases they can understand. If I am banned because of it, well, I'll survive.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> You are hardly a realist. And I, along with everyone else, do get to decide what is and is not insulting. Where do you think word definitions originate? God.... The Devil.... Magic? Pull your head out of your ass. Read a book or two. Learn something useful.


Your statements are offensive and insulting. I do not care about p24 video, so Canon’s omission of it doesn’t bother me in the slightest, much less insult me. Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant to anyone but you, and your apparent belief that you get to decide what others care about is pure hubris (you might need to look that one up). I’m sorry that concept is so difficult for you to comprehend.

Meanwhile, here’s a definition for you, that fits your current behavior quite well...

*pu·er·ile * /ˈpyo͝orəl,ˈpyo͝orˌīl/ _adjective_
1. childishly silly and trivial.

So I’ll repeat...grow up. You’re just embarrassing yourself.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> I'll not do that.
> 
> Nice try, though. Everyone decides through usage the meaning of the words and phrases we use. Redin is hard, isn't it?


I decide that you are intentionally trying to insult me, and am going to act accordingly.

Good luck.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Your statements are offensive and insulting. I do not care about p24 video, so Canon’s omission of it doesn’t bother me in the slightest, much less insult me. Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant to anyone but you, and your apparent belief that you get to decide what others care about is pure hubris (you might need to look that one up). I’m sorry that concept is so difficult for you to comprehend.
> 
> Meanwhile, here’s a definition for you, that fits your current behavior quite well...
> 
> ...



Actually, I'm not embarrassing myself. For instance, you wrote this:



> your apparent belief that you get to decide what others care about is pure hubris



It might be apparent to you that that I believe what you claim I believe. But I don't. I don't care much about what others care about. But, as I pointed out a while back, what others care or not care about is irrelevant to the social significance of an act. Canon removed a commonly present capacity from a camera. Few people will care about that. But, the fact that they removed that capacity reflects a disdain for its customers. Canon likely spent more money removing the capacity than they would have spent had they left it intact. That was an insult to its customers. It showed a scorn for those customers who needed or wanted that capacity.

Your claim misses the point I made, and is thus fallacious. It is also a red herring, and is thus fallacious. You might want to feel embarrassed by your faulty reasoning. But, I doubt you will.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I decide that you are intentionally trying to insult me, and am going to act accordingly.
> 
> Good luck.



You also. I already decided you intention meant to insult me. My motto: Play fair with the fair people, be a bastard with the bastards.


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Aug 4, 2019)

For some it’s a distraction to focus on megapixels and not other improvements. It can be terrific marketing 

I am sure that some folks really want this.
I am confident that more people are asking for other improvements. I support any improvement in photography but this camera better have more than just megapixels or else it will be a niche product. 

Sensible canon fans want to see canon really innovate again with their bodies. Megapixels is one way to do that but I think many would like to see other things instead or as well.

Canon lenses are still the best: by far
Their bodies are no longer the best.
Hopefully that changes soon.



QUOTE="melgross, post: 785683, member: 378601"]
You know, with all the disparaging of the “megapixel wars”, people seem to forget that those wars, thought of back then as the sharpness wars, began in the very beginning of photography, in the early 19th century.

This is nothing new, and I don’t understand why some seem so upset about it.
[/QUOTE]


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> Why should I watch my language? If I must contend with trolls following me around, I'll reply to them using words and phrases they can understand. If I am banned because of it, well, I'll survive.


it is up to the forum moderator to decide. you are reported.


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Aug 4, 2019)

I have watched this forum for years 
I don’t understand the rules here

Is the forum explicitly for just positive views on canon?
If it’s an open forum then I don’t understand why a criticism is repeatedly attacked by the same members. The pattern of behavior and the members who do this is pretty consistent. It only serves to create an echo chamber. 

Is it reasonable to expect a range of opinions without toxicity?



CanonFanBoy said:


> If you are referring to 4k 24fps video: The RP, R, 5D Mark IV and 1DX Mark II all have 4k 24fps. So, what are you talking about?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 4, 2019)

Drcampbellicu said:


> I have watched this forum for years
> I don’t understand the rules here


here they are . Just FYI:





__





Posting rules


Some users have asked for a set of posting rules. We are not into the business of making a specific set of rules and laws, its impossible to cover everything. Moderators will use their best judgement to remove offensive items and issue warnings or even bans. Here are some general common...




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Aug 4, 2019)

I bird and do scuba photography as a hobby
I have a few canon friends that have the same opinion about mirrorless.

Most of them are older and will not switch. I am personally excited for mirrorless. I think it will be better over time in almost every facet but it will be a disruptive change

My biggest concern is that I realize that my current L lenses are about to be coal mines: ancient history. Has anyone started a serious conversation about this?

We need to stop quibbling about Sony and Nikon. Canon itself seems to be hinting that their future is mirrorless based on these impressive new lenses that they’re releasing.




QUOTE="Mike27713, post: 785981, member: 383077"]
Canon can stick their Mirrorless cameras up their Cannon! I will always avoid mirrorless. I don't wanna compose on a TV screen! I have been waiting for several years for Canon to come out with a 5Dsr2. Money has long been in my pocket for it. Maybe I can find another manufacturer that will do a high megapixel DSLR and sell off my Canon equipment. I've been a Canon customer for many decades. If I wanted a large point and shoot, I would have bought one a long time ago!
[/QUOTE]


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> it is up to the forum moderator to decide. you are reported.



I'll decide, and I'll live with the consequences.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> Canon removed a commonly present capacity from a camera. Few people will care about that. But, the fact that they removed that capacity reflects a disdain for its customers. Canon likely spent more money removing the capacity than they would have spent had they left it intact. That was an insult to its customers. It showed a scorn for those customers who needed or wanted that capacity.


Has Canon publicly stated their reasoning for dropping 1080p24 from the RP? Have you had personal communications with Canon execs where they’ve explained their rationale? I suspect the answer to both is no. Thus, your ascription of motivation to them is purely your speculative opinion. As if Canon execs sit in a boardroom formulating strategies to alienate their customers.






Far more likely, it’s a simple business decision. They put in 2160p24, no need for p24 at lower resolutions. Or, if people want 1080p24, they’ll have to buy the R to get it, meaning more revenue for Canon (unless they buy a competitor’s camera, but if product differentiation was their intent, I’m sure they ran projections based on their data to estimate net effect on profit of that decision).

The point is, there are logical business reasons for the decision. You aren’t happy with their decision, so you personally feel insulted and scorned. The thing is, no one else...and certainly not Canon, gives a damn how you feel. Nor do you get to determine how others should feel about it.

If you feel scorned, by all means unleash the full fury that Hell hath no fury like on them, and don’t buy any more Canon products. That’ll show ‘em. 

Ps. The ascription of any ‘emotional’ motivation – negative or positive – to a large corporation’s view of their customers is naïve at best. Canon didn’t omit 1080p24 from the RP out of disdain for customers any more than they included focus stacking in the RP because they love their customers with all their little corporate hearts. But then again, feeling personally insulted by a corporate business decision fits with the definition of puerile. Like when your mommy took your favorite toy away and you cried.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 4, 2019)

So all the agony over 24p is really about a camera that has it at higher resolutions, but not lower ones?

Really?


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Aug 4, 2019)

I understand your position 

I wish some of these discussions wouldn’t escalate but it’s a free country.

I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these intense debates turn more casual people off from posting. It might reinforce a troll vs fanboy image for websites like this. I want to assume that there’s a middle ground but am not sure what that is



sdz said:


> I'll decide, and I'll live with the consequences.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

Drcampbellicu said:


> I understand your position
> 
> I wish some of these discussions wouldn’t escalate but it’s a free country.
> 
> I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these intense debates turn more casual people off from posting. It might reinforce a troll vs fanboy image for websites like this. I want to assume that there’s a middle ground but am not sure what that is



It's the internet. Apart from banning people, there is not much that can be done about posters who want to score points over posters. I use a tit for tat strategy. It does not always work.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Has Canon publicly stated their reasoning for dropping 1080p24 from the RP? Have you had personal communications with Canon execs where they’ve explained their rationale? I suspect the answer to both is no. Thus, your ascription of motivation to them is purely your speculative opinion. As if Canon execs sit in a boardroom formulating strategies to alienate their customers.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Still lost in space, I see. 

There was no logical, business rational reason for the decision.

I did not ascribe an emotional motive to Canon.

I did not feel personally insulted by Canon's decision. I was annoyed by the company's thoughtlessness.

I'll end this conversation now. You are neither interesting, witty nor intelligent. I gain nothing from this discussion. So, have the last word.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 4, 2019)

Drcampbellicu said:


> I understand your position
> 
> I wish some of these discussions wouldn’t escalate but it’s a free country.
> 
> I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these intense debates turn more casual people off from posting. It might reinforce a troll vs fanboy image for websites like this. I want to assume that there’s a middle ground but am not sure what that is



Well "tit for tat" is a bad strategy.

First, most often what happens is that people post using their id rather than their ego. They don't think through what they are saying and make assertions and demands that are self-centered, unrealistic and frequently not fact-based.

Long time participants call them out. Some of the long time participants have a tendency to seek out the weak and attack, but most simply are frustrated by hearing the same faulty and self-centered arguments over and over again.

Then, too often, in the next round, the original poster, instead of acknowledging their mistakes, decides to double down. That seldom works out well. Often the original comment was simply wrong and doubling down won't make it right. What does happen then is that others tend to join in, because the argument has now gotten absurd.

I follow a simple strategy that has worked for nearly a decade on this forum.

First, I try to think before I type. Second, I try to examine my own positions to see if I have some facts to back up what I am saying and make sure I express my opinions as just that, opinions. I still get flamed by people, but when that happens, I stand my ground using logic not insults.

At the same time, if someone makes a valid point that refutes my original premise, I find no dishonor in admitting that I was wrong. In fact, I try to make it a habit to acknowledge my own errors, if I have indeed made a mistake. I find it amazing that so few people on the internet ever seem to be able to admit they were wrong. People should try it once and awhile, it's amazingly effective.

Even the biggest attack dogs on this forum will back off if you engage them with logic and facts and ratchet down the rhetoric. But, trading insults or "tit for tat" never works and generally makes you look foolish to all the forum participants.

No one ever "wins" an argument on the internet. At the end of the day, all you can do is be satisfied that you have expressed your viewpoint in a rational way.

EDIT: re-reading this I realized I may be coming off as a bit pompous or preachy. Not my intent. And, I must admit that I am guilty sometimes of posting an insulting response when I get frustrated by the never-ending repetition of the talking points.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> Still lost in space, I see.
> 
> There was no logical, business rational reason for the decision.
> 
> ...


I'm still insulted there is no longer a place for a film cartridge in modern Canons. Pure thoughtlessness.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> There was no logical, business rational reason for the decision.


I provided two, and there are others. If you can’t comprehend them, that’s your failing. 



sdz said:


> I did not ascribe an emotional motive to Canon.


Let’s revisit:


sdz said:


> But, the fact that they removed that capacity *reflects a disdain for its customers*. Canon likely spent more money removing the capacity than they would have spent had they left it intact. That was an insult to its customers. It *showed a scorn for those customers* who needed or wanted that capacity.


You indicated Canon has a disdain for its customers and treated them with scorn. If you don’t believe that’s ascribing an emotional motivation to them, your metacognition is as poorly developed as your logical thinking. 




sdz said:


> I did not feel personally insulted by Canon's decision. I was annoyed by the company's thoughtlessness.


Clearly you did. You also stated to another member:


sdz said:


> You should have felt insulted. That you were unaware of or unconcerned about this insult does not alter the fact that it was an insult.


Or are you actually claiming that you didn’t feel insulted that 1080p24 was removed but someone who had stated they don’t care about it _should_ feel insulted? That’s asinine. But from you, asinine is no surprise. 



sdz said:


> I'll end this conversation now. You are neither interesting, witty nor intelligent. I gain nothing from this discussion. So, have the last word.


You’ve been the one continuing it. You were the one who initiated the insults (although your offensive posts were deleted). You have displayed a high level of rudeness coupled with a lack comprehension of facts and an inability to think logically. It’s good that you’re choosing to run away from a conversation to which you’ve added nothing but rancor and inanity.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I'm still insulted there is no longer a place for a film cartridge in modern Canons. Pure thoughtlessness.



You can put film into your digitial cameras. Use a hammer.


----------



## Talys (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Just realistic. Sorry, you don’t get to decide what is insulting, for anyone except yourself. Grow up.


A common theme amongst many anti-Canon trolls is the disbelief of the lack of outrage of others, especially when it comes to feature segmentation. In their minds, if Canon can do something, it is insulting if that isn't available in everything that us midrange and up (ie anything they would buy).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

stevelee said:


> So all the agony over 24p is really about a camera that has it at higher resolutions, but not lower ones?
> 
> Really?


Apparently so. Apparently we should all feel insulted that Canon took away p24 from 1080 but provided 2160p24 instead. Or because they took away VGA output. Or because the EOS RP doesn’t make coffee. Words like pathetic and ridiculous come to mind.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

Talys said:


> A common theme amongst many anti-Canon trolls is the disbelief of the lack of outrage of others, especially when it comes to feature segmentation. In their minds, if Canon can do something, it is insulting if that isn't available in everything that us midrange and up (ie anything they would buy).


I think it’s more basic than that. Some people simply believe that because they want something or feel a certain way, everyone else must want it or feel the same. It’s reflective of a very early stage of child emotional development.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Well "tit for tat" is a bad strategy.
> 
> First, most often what happens is that people post using their id rather than their ego. They don't think through what they are saying and make assertions and demands that are self-centered, unrealistic and frequently not fact-based.
> 
> ...



Tit for tat is a superb strategy, or so say the game theorists who study this matter.

I am thoughtful to a fault. And I feel no need to admit that I was wrong because, well, I was not wrong.



> No one ever "wins" an argument on the internet. At the end of the day, all you can do is be satisfied that you have expressed your viewpoint in a rational way.



This. By the way, the tit for tat strategy is not meant to win arguments. It is meant to end conflict. I use it because I see more than my share of Clavins who want to set me straight about something. I have nothing to gain by debating fools.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> Tit for tat is a superb strategy, or so say the game theorists who study this matter.
> 
> I am thoughtful to a fault. And I feel no need to admit that I was wrong because, well, I was not wrong.
> 
> ...


Yeah, it seems to be working out really well for you.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

Talys said:


> A common theme amongst many anti-Canon trolls is the disbelief of the lack of outrage of others, especially when it comes to feature segmentation. In their minds, if Canon can do something, it is insulting if that isn't available in everything that us midrange and up (ie anything they would buy).



Your claim would make sense with respect to what I wrote if I had demanded outrageous performance capabilities in a modestly priced camera. I criticized Canon for dropping support for a capacity that one would expect to find for no discernable reason.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Apparently so. Apparently we should all feel insulted that Canon took away p24 from 1080 but provided 2160p24 instead. Or because they took away VGA output. Or because the EOS RP doesn’t make coffee. Words like pathetic and ridiculous come to mind.


I’m still hurt that they took away the 22MP sensor from 5Diii when releasing the 5Div.


----------



## sdz (Aug 4, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Yeah, it seems to be working out really well for you.



Fools are often tireless, they do not learn from experience and they look to others to validate their foolishness.


----------



## Pape (Aug 4, 2019)

you can tape film square over sensor just needing do it on darkroom


----------



## unfocused (Aug 4, 2019)

Drcampbellicu said:


> ...My biggest concern is that I realize that my current L lenses are about to be coal mines: ancient history. Has anyone started a serious conversation about this?...



There were a number of conversations about this, both before and shortly after the R mount was announced. I think a lot of people are less concerned about this now that the adapters have been released and we've found they work remarkably well. 

For me, I will continue to buy EF lenses so long as I am using both DSLRs and mirrorless. If I ever switch to exclusively mirrorless I will then gradually replace EF lenses with R lenses, but for the foreseeable future, I see no real advantage to R lenses, unless they produce something that I really want and can't get as an EF lens. 

I did purchase the R 24-105 f4 zoom (actually, there was a very good deal with the combination) and I wanted to try the native lens. Also, since this is my most used lens, I felt it would be more convenient to have it in an R mount for the R and keep the EF mount for my DSLRs. But, I'm not itching to buy any other R mount lenses and will simply wait and see what Canon releases in the next few years as far as both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras before making any major lens purchases. 

I continue to think that Canon made a mistake in not producing an adapter to allow R lenses to be used on DSLRs. My personal opinion is that R mount lenses won't really take off so long as people are using both mirrorless and DSLRs side by side and an R adapter for DSLRs would have allowed them to further promote the interchangeability of the system. However I'm not Canon.

Bottom line: I don't think anyone should worry about their EF lenses suddenly going obsolete. Perhaps in the future, Canon will introduce some features that take advantage of the new R mount that can't be done with an EF lens, but even in that case, it's not going to suddenly make the EF lenses quit working, or work less well than they do today.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> Fools are often tireless, they do not learn from experience and they look to others to validate their foolishness.


You’re the case in point for that!


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 4, 2019)

stevelee said:


> So all the agony over 24p is really about a camera that has it at higher resolutions, but not lower ones?
> 
> Really?



I'll phrase it differently: On the RP there's no 24p mode that has DPAF. The autofocus in 4k is shockingly bad. On the R, autofocus in 4k does a good job.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 4, 2019)

unfocused said:


> There were a number of conversations about this, both before and shortly after the R mount was announced. I think a lot of people are less concerned about this now that the adapters have been released and we've found they work remarkably well.



I'm actually inclined to buy EF variants instead of RF variants now that I have the CPL adapter


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 4, 2019)

unfocused said:


> For me, I will continue to buy EF lenses so long as I am using both DSLRs and mirrorless. If I ever switch to exclusively mirrorless I will then gradually replace EF lenses with R lenses, but for the foreseeable future, I see no real advantage to R lenses, unless they produce something that I really want and can't get as an EF lens.



That's the key. A 24-70 f/2.8L II is the same lens today that it was yesterday. Canon is trying very hard to produce R variants that will make you want to upgrade. So we have the 28-70 f/2 and will have a 24-70 f/2.8 IS for the RF mount. But if you don't need those improvements, nothing changes, even if you add an RF mount body. The existing EF variant remains a remarkably sharp, well built, fast aperture, fast focusing lens that will work just as well via adapter on the R as it does on a DSLR.

Adapters within and to every other system have caveats. Canon secured the life and longevity of the entire EF line with their mount and adapter. Given this fact I don't know why people are hesitant or worried regarding EF lenses and even EF DSLRs. If I needed to today I would have no hesitation picking up another 5Ds or adding a 5D4, and certainly no reservation about picking an EF lens if it was the best price/performance fit for my needs.



> I continue to think that Canon made a mistake in not producing an adapter to allow R lenses to be used on DSLRs.



There's physically no way to do this. 

I still wonder if Canon would have been better off using the EF mount in their mirrorless bodies but with a modification which allowed RF lenses to extend back into the mount, just like EF-S. An RF lens still couldn't sit on a DSLR, but EF lenses could attach to R bodies without an adapter. I suppose in the end Canon determined that they would still be introducing a split into their lens line in order to take advantage of the closer registration distance, and a new mount would let them shave some depth and weight from the R bodies.



> Bottom line: I don't think anyone should worry about their EF lenses suddenly going obsolete. Perhaps in the future, Canon will introduce some features that take advantage of the new R mount that can't be done with an EF lens, but even in that case, it's not going to suddenly make the EF lenses quit working, or work less well than they do today.



Exactly, and well said.


----------



## Drcampbellicu (Aug 4, 2019)

It’s probably just me but the new lenses look amazing 
I just keep thinking that in a few years there won’t be a good reason to buy an older L unless it’s used and significantly discounted 

The new lenses are very expensive 
But once I see a great new mirrorless body then I will likely start the conversion and ditch my old faithfuls.



QUOTE="unfocused, post: 786222, member: 69"]
There were a number of conversations about this, both before and shortly after the R mount was announced. I think a lot of people are less concerned about this now that the adapters have been released and we've found they work remarkably well. 

For me, I will continue to buy EF lenses so long as I am using both DSLRs and mirrorless. If I ever switch to exclusively mirrorless I will then gradually replace EF lenses with R lenses, but for the foreseeable future, I see no real advantage to R lenses, unless they produce something that I really want and can't get as an EF lens. 

I did purchase the R 24-105 f4 zoom (actually, there was a very good deal with the combination) and I wanted to try the native lens. Also, since this is my most used lens, I felt it would be more convenient to have it in an R mount for the R and keep the EF mount for my DSLRs. But, I'm not itching to buy any other R mount lenses and will simply wait and see what Canon releases in the next few years as far as both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras before making any major lens purchases. 

I continue to think that Canon made a mistake in not producing an adapter to allow R lenses to be used on DSLRs. My personal opinion is that R mount lenses won't really take off so long as people are using both mirrorless and DSLRs side by side and an R adapter for DSLRs would have allowed them to further promote the interchangeability of the system. However I'm not Canon.

Bottom line: I don't think anyone should worry about their EF lenses suddenly going obsolete. Perhaps in the future, Canon will introduce some features that take advantage of the new R mount that can't be done with an EF lens, but even in that case, it's not going to suddenly make the EF lenses quit working, or work less well than they do today.
[/QUOTE]


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> > I continue to think that Canon made a mistake in not producing an adapter to allow R lenses to be used on DSLRs.
> 
> 
> There's physically no way to do this.


Sure there is. It would require optics in the adapter, and would almost certainly result in a loss of image quality, but it’s possible.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

sdz said:


> I criticized Canon for dropping support for a capacity that one would expect to find for no discernable reason.


No reason that _you_ can discern. Again, the failing is on your part, not Canon’s. The fact that the R has 1080p24 and the RP does not makes it clear that the omission was purposeful. But you don’t get it, you don’t like it, you went on a rant over it, then you went off the rails when others chose not to jump in the crap pile with you.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 4, 2019)

As Unfocused said: I don't think anyone should worry about their EF lenses suddenly going obsolete. Perhaps in the future, Canon will introduce some features that take advantage of the new R mount that can't be done with an EF lens, but even in that case, it's not going to suddenly make the EF lenses quit working, or work less well than they do today.


The introduction of IBIS will probably be one of those features. My guess is that to get the best performance of IBIS and OS working in tandem, that you will need the faster communication speeds of the R lenses.

Mind you, this is just a guess...

In the meantime, all my EF glass works on an R. That makes it crystal clear that Canon did not abandon all those EF users. This gives us time to gradually migrate to the new system, plus it gives Canon time to gradually introduce that new system. We ended up with a graceful transition instead of a discontinuity.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 4, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> No reason that _you_ can discern. Again, the failing is on your part, not Canon’s. The fact that the R has 1080p24 and the RP does not makes it clear that the omission was purposeful. But you don’t get it, you don’t like it, you went on a rant over it, then you went off the rails when others chose not to jump in the crap pile with you.


Perhaps you should try to explain to him how higher end cameras have more features than lower end cameras


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> Perhaps you should try to explain to him how higher end cameras have more features than lower end cameras


It’s a good suggestion, but it absolutely reeks of logic, and I’ve tried that approach already without success.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Aug 5, 2019)

Drcampbellicu said:


> I understand your position
> 
> I wish some of these discussions wouldn’t escalate but it’s a free country.
> 
> I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these intense debates turn more casual people off from posting. It might reinforce a troll vs fanboy image for websites like this. I want to assume that there’s a middle ground but am not sure what that is


The problem is that there are so many posts by Sony trolls/shills/hopefuls in need of validation for a decision that they may or may not make if Canon don't do X Y or Z, that people vent their frustrations very easily now. And I say Sony trolls etc because there are not constant idiotic and annoying comments from people lauding Fuji or Olympus or Nikon etc. Just Sony. So basically now if anyone dares mention Sony then expect flak. Rightly or wrongly those making legitimate points will be lumped in with the trolls.


----------



## hamish (Aug 5, 2019)

hamish said:


> If you’re serious about not wanting your Canon EF lenses anymore, send them to me. I’ll happily pay postage. DM me and we’ll sort this out. Thanks



Strangely, I've not heard from "st jack photography". Not very saintly to not reply to such a generous offer


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 5, 2019)

sdz said:


> You should have felt insulted. That you were unaware of or unconcerned about this insult does not alter the fact that it was an insult. If someone were to call you a dirty ~$?!*!%+×@ to your face and if you were not bothered by that fact, we would rightly say that you were insulted and also that you took the insult in stride. The act determines the characteristics attributed to it, not the feelings of the target.



I'm more insulted by the fact that someone else thinks they get to decide what should and should not insult me. But before you get all tingly and self-satisfied, you should realize I'm only insulted about 0.001 on a scale of 1-10 by your presumption that you get to decide how everyone else should be insulted about lack of a video feature on a camera I bought for the sole purpose of shooting still images.

In fact, now that I think about it, I'm much, more insulted that I had to pay for any video technology/features in a camera I never, ever intend to use to record video footage. That's what dedicated video cameras are for. You know, like the kinds of cameras those "in the industry" use for video production?


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 5, 2019)

Besisika said:


> My attitude toward photography is simple: "how can I stand out if I shoot like everybody else?". I hate repeating what a billion on our planet is doing. I want to do something else.



You can start by framing something interesting in a way that others find aesthetically pleasing. Do that well and you can get away with the worst camera and lens currently on the market.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 5, 2019)

sdz said:


> Your claim would make sense with respect to what I wrote if I had demanded outrageous performance capabilities in a modestly priced camera. I criticized Canon for dropping support for a capacity that one would expect to find for no discernable reason.



I thought your superior discernment determined that the reason Canon dropped support for 1080p 24fps was "scorn for their customers" or something along those lines?


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 5, 2019)

sdz said:


> Fools are often tireless, they do not learn from experience and they look to others to validate their foolishness.



Ok, I'll try to say this in a way that you can understand.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 5, 2019)

Besisika said:


> My attitude toward photography is simple: "how can I stand out if I shoot like everybody else?". I hate repeating what a billion on our planet is doing. I want to do something else.





Michael Clark said:


> You can start by framing something interesting in a way that others find aesthetically pleasing. Do that well and you can get away with the worst camera and lens currently on the market.



To be fair, I find it admirable that someone is trying to find a new way to express himself or herself through photography. The key, though, is to have something to say other than just making something look different. My college photography professor used a panoramic camera, but never shot panoramas. Instead he used the camera as a documentary tool, shooting ordinary scenes in extraordinary ways. He went on to work for Ansel Adams and his wife eventually became Adams' official biographer.

I mentioned Andreas Gursky in my original response. Gursky has used large format cameras and film and painstaking digital manipulation to create a unique vision and earn himself a permanent place in the history of photography. Kudos to Besisika for trying to forge his own vision.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 5, 2019)

unfocused said:


> To be fair, I find it admirable that someone is trying to find a new way to express himself or herself through photography. The key, though, is to have something to say other than just making something look different. My college photography professor used a panoramic camera, but never shot panoramas. Instead he used the camera as a documentary tool, shooting ordinary scenes in extraordinary ways. He went on to work for Ansel Adams and his wife eventually became Adams' official biographer.
> 
> I mentioned Andreas Gursky in my original response. Gursky has used large format cameras and film and painstaking digital manipulation to create a unique vision and earn himself a permanent place in the history of photography. Kudos to Besisika for trying to forge his own vision.



Along those lines, I like to recognize Jerry Uelsmann, who can make better composites with film, chemicals, and a darkroom than I can with photoshop and a supercomputer, e.g., this 1976 print (untitled):


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 5, 2019)

unfocused said:


> To be fair, I find it admirable that someone is trying to find a new way to express himself or herself through photography. The key, though, is to have something to say other than just making something look different. My college photography professor used a panoramic camera, but never shot panoramas. Instead he used the camera as a documentary tool, shooting ordinary scenes in extraordinary ways. He went on to work for Ansel Adams and his wife eventually became Adams' official biographer.
> 
> I mentioned Andreas Gursky in my original response. Gursky has used large format cameras and film and painstaking digital manipulation to create a unique vision and earn himself a permanent place in the history of photography. Kudos to Besisika for trying to forge his own vision.



I'm not criticizing Besisika for wanting to stand out. I'm making the observation that gear that is minisculely better than what the "billion other people" are using isn't the way to get there.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 5, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Along those lines, I like to recognize Jerry Uelsmann, who can make better composites with film, chemicals, and a darkroom than I can with photoshop and a supercomputer, e.g., this 1976 print (untitled):
> 
> View attachment 185908


Yeah! Go Jerry. Amazing too because he had the courage to go against the then-dominant f64 heritage that preached straight photography as the only acceptable way to create photographic art. (In the U.S. at least -- in Europe there had long been a more accepting and inclusive view of photography as art thanks to artists like Man Ray and Moholy Nagy.)


----------



## unfocused (Aug 5, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> I'm not criticizing Besisika for wanting to stand out. I'm making the observation that better gear isn't the way to get there.


Yes, but I think he has something in mind involving very high resolution images, which of course, would require specialized gear and technique. I jumped down his throat because his original post didn't really explain what he had in mind and it struck me that he was being a tad elitist about high resolution images. After some discussion, I think I have a better idea where he was coming from. I'm just trying to right my wrong.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 5, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Along those lines, I like to recognize Jerry Uelsmann, who can make better composites with film, chemicals, and a darkroom than I can with photoshop and a supercomputer, e.g., this 1976 print (untitled):
> 
> View attachment 185908


Jerry Uelsmann is a darkroom wizard!


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 5, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I still use my 10D, 6mp Camera.


6mp is just the right size for Instagram. I always am amazed about those guys using a 40+ MP monster camera for their Instagram postings. Back in the 1970s John Martyn already wrote the right song for them: "some people are crrrrazy!"


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 5, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Michael
> Unfortunately, many of us birders are in that territory of verging on pixelation, just taking the centre 1500x1500 px or fewer. If I can get a 1000 px in length on a bird, I can usually get a good enough detailed image. But, I get what you mean.


As a birder (not only but I love doing it, did it yesterday again) I'd add that birding is a trade-off between pixel size and the light-motion problem. With the latter I mean that birds are often moving fast, smaller pixels require higher shutter speeds for freezing them sharply on the pixel level, but the amount of light available is finite. This is why I sometimes prefer to use my old 22 MP only FF 5D3 over my crop sensor 7D2, when I shoot birds. With less light, the 5D3's images tend to be much more "crisp" on the pixel level. So then I really prefer such a bird image over the 7D2's mushy output with more pixels in the bird's image area but less information on the pixel level. Of course, I know I could downsize an image to get about the same results (if the camera's sensor technologies are about comparable), but I love get the out-of-camera images as good as possible w/o too much post-processing. (Maybe I am sort of old-school-corrupted because I still shoot film in parallel to digital.)


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 5, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> As a birder (not only but I love doing it, did it yesterday again) I'd add that birding is a trade-off between pixel size and the light-motion problem. With the latter I mean that birds are often moving fast, smaller pixels require higher shutter speeds for freezing them sharply on the pixel level, but the amount of light available is finite. This is why I sometimes prefer to use my old 22 MP only FF 5D3 over my crop sensor 7D2, when I shoot birds. With less light, the 5D3's images tend to be much more "crisp" on the pixel level. So then I really prefer such a bird image over the 7D2's mushy output with more pixels in the bird's image area but less information on the pixel level. Of course, I know I could downsize an image to get about the same results (if the camera's sensor technologies are about comparable), but I love get the out-of-camera images as good as possible w/o too much post-processing. (Maybe I am sort of old-school-corrupted because I still shoot film in parallel to digital.)


CURSE THOSE LAWS OF PHYSICS!

I hit that same quandary a lot. The crop camera has a greater pixel density so I get more pixels on the target, but the FF camera puts better quality pixels on the target. If the light is great, I tend to go crop, and when it gets a bit dimmer (or I am not zoomed to the Max) I prefer to go FF. My crop camera is faster, but the FF camera seems to have more accurate AF. The crop has a far better spread of AF points.

And my phone beats them both for convenience......

And my P/S is waterproof with terrible ergonomics and IQ ....... but it is waterproof!

I find each has its place. No way will I say that one is better than the other for everything, it’s sort of a “right tool for the job” type of thing. We here a lot of comments on this forum about why can’t Canon make a camera that meets MY specific needs, but so often those needs are conflicting. 

If Canon does come out with a high megapixel R, there will be a lot of cursing and wailing on this forum because “that isn’t the camera I want”, but for those it is targeted at it will be a great camera. For those who it isn’t for, be patient, your turn will come.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 5, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> ...For those who it isn’t for, be patient, your turn will come.



Maybe. But, I think there are a lot of people waiting for a camera that Canon feels it has already released in the EOS R.


----------



## Architect1776 (Aug 5, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Maybe. But, I think there are a lot of people waiting for a camera that Canon feels it has already released in the EOS R.



I would have already likely purchased the R except for IBIS. My sole reason for going R mount is to use my FD, FL and R lenses without an optical element in the way, but I want IBIS as IS has spoiled me. Otherwise I am very happy with my 7D as it does very well thank you.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 5, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> CURSE THOSE LAWS OF PHYSICS!





Don Haines said:


> CURSE THOSE LAWS OF PHYSICS!
> 
> If Canon does come out with a high megapixel R, there will be a lot of cursing and wailing on this forum because “that isn’t the camera I want”, but for those it is targeted at it will be a great camera. For those who it isn’t for, be patient, your turn will come.


Well, as a physicist I do not completely with your curse  since a universe with different laws may contain no matter, only energy, which would be a bit boring... But I completely agree with your comment regarding cameras: they are different tools for different needs - as it always has been in the history of photography. Finally you have to find out what serves you best.


----------



## Dantana (Aug 5, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> I would have already likely purchased the R except for IBIS. My sole reason for going R mount is to use my FD, FL and R lenses without an optical element in the way, but I want IBIS as IS has spoiled me. Otherwise I am very happy with my 7D as it does very well thank you.


And that's totally valid, for you. I would wager that "people who want to adapt vintage glass but really want IS" is not a huge market segment in the way that Canon looks at things.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 5, 2019)

Dantana said:


> And that's totally valid, for you. I would wager that "people who want to adapt vintage glass but really want IS" is not a huge market segment in the way that Canon looks at things.


I have seen a lot of Sony users with vintage lenses adapted so far, including vintage Canon and Nikon lenses. I am quite sure that Canon will come up with a sort of IBIS in future, recently they filed a patent even for a DSLR with IBIS according to CR. I guess that they will try to optimize the interplay between IS and IBIS. 

That said, on can survive in many situations without any image stabilization. I still use vintage film cameras with which I often have to reside to quite slow shutter speeds, because most films do not allow extreme ISOs. It really depends on the camera's mechanics. With classic rangefinders I can really go down to 1/30 s, sometimes even slower shutter speeds, because there is no mirror slap. And the R is mirrorless, continuing Canon's tradition from 1930s-60s, ...


----------



## navastronia (Aug 5, 2019)

justaCanonuser said:


> I have seen a lot of Sony users with vintage lenses adapted so far, including vintage Canon and Nikon lenses. I am quite sure that Canon will come up with a sort of IBIS in future, recently they filed a patent even for a DSLR with IBIS according to CR. I guess that they will try to optimize the interplay between IS and IBIS.
> 
> That said, on can survive in many situations without any image stabilization. I still use vintage film cameras with which I often have to reside to quite slow shutter speeds, because most films do not allow extreme ISOs. It really depends on the camera's mechanics. With classic rangefinders I can really go down to 1/30 s, sometimes even slower shutter speeds, because there is no mirror slap. And the R is mirrorless, continuing Canon's tradition from 1930s-60s, ...



One of my all-time favorite lenses is a vintage Yashica 50/1.7 DX that won't focus to infinity without hitting the mirror on a full-frame Canon DSLR. I'm considering taking a dremel tool to the metal to try to shave off enough to make it usable, so I understand the obsession with using vintage glass for any reason at all


----------



## Dantana (Aug 5, 2019)

navastronia said:


> One of my all-time favorite lenses is a vintage Yashica 50/1.7 DX that won't focus to infinity without hitting the mirror on a full-frame Canon DSLR. I'm considering taking a dremel tool to the metal to try to shave off enough to make it usable, so I understand the obsession with using vintage glass for any reason at all


Oh, I get it too. I have a little Pentax 50 that I'd love to use, and I'm sure there are some ancient cinema lenses buried in my closet that would be fun to play with.

All I'm saying is that "people who use vintage glass and want IBIS" is a subset of the users of forums like this who are a tiny subset of the camera market.I don't expect that they/we are much of a thought for Canon's plans. Especially when Canon would like you to buy shiny new RF glass.

The high MP R most likely won't be my next camera, but not because I think there's anything that will be wrong about it. It's not for me. I don't need that kind of resolution. The original R is much closer to what I would be looking for, but I'm not really desperate for a new body. My 6D still give me high quality images even with it's limitations. I am curious about what comes out in the next few months though.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Aug 6, 2019)

navastronia said:


> One of my all-time favorite lenses is a vintage Yashica 50/1.7 DX that won't focus to infinity without hitting the mirror on a full-frame Canon DSLR. I'm considering taking a dremel tool to the metal to try to shave off enough to make it usable, so I understand the obsession with using vintage glass for any reason at all


There is a lot of wonderful glass out there, if you like the special characters of vintage lenses. I can imagine that the Yashica is a nice lens, and obviously there are already (non-infinity) adapters available (



). Specialists such as Quenox will surely come up with a growing line of different adapters for the RF system. I expect first Canon FD-RF adapters to hit the market, for Canon fans, another early candidate could be Leica screw mount M39-RF adapters, because there is a huge selection of M39 lenses still available, including cheap Russian lenses (just check Ebay). And surely a bad boy will come up with a Nikon F-RF nightmare adapter (and vice versa)


----------



## uri.raz (Aug 6, 2019)

st jack photography said:


> requires an adapter to mount any of my tilt-shift lenses.....



Which MILC does not require an adapter to mount tilt-shift lenses?


----------



## tron (Aug 6, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> Which MILC does not require an adapter to mount tilt-shift lenses?


He is a troll. Complaing about his obsolete EF lenses which need an adapter to be used in Canon mirrorless cameras but at the same time saying he is in peace of mind because he can put his EF lenses to his Sony camera!


----------



## uri.raz (Aug 6, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Go into a Ford dealer and try to buy an F-150 with some, but not all, of the options offered in a specific trim level. Let us know what happens.



Reminds me of a joke...

A dude goes to a BMW dealership and orders a top model with all the options. After three weeks the car arrives, and the dude goes out to show off. He stops in a red light next to a Volkswagen Veetle upgraded to the teeth. He opens the window and asks the beetle driver - do you have heated leather seats? Sure! Do you have a turbo charger? Sure! and so on, until the beetle driver asks "do you have a king size bed in your BMW?" The dud says no, but you couldn't possibly have one in the VW Beetle. The beetle driver opens the back window, and - lo and behold! - there's a king size bed in the car.

The dude takes his car back to the dealership and asks for a king size bed to be installed. The manager says "we'll have to cut the chassis, weld in additional parts, lengthen the car, have safety tests made, it's going to cost you!", and the dude says no problem.

A month later he gets the worked up car, and out he goes to show off to the VW Beetle driver. He drives all around the country, until one day, early in the morning, he finds him on a mountain side overlooking the sun rising over the sea. He calls the BW Driver, who comes out with wet hair and a robe, looks in, and asks "and this is what you got me out of my jacuzzi for?!"


----------



## Architect1776 (Aug 6, 2019)

Dantana said:


> And that's totally valid, for you. I would wager that "people who want to adapt vintage glass but really want IS" is not a huge market segment in the way that Canon looks at things.



Most likely. Another advantage is smaller, less expensive RF and EF lenses.


----------



## Dantana (Aug 7, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> Most likely. Another advantage is smaller, less expensive RF and EF lenses.


That's true, and I'd love that. But, is making less expensive lenses part of Canon's strategy? Does it make sense for them business-wise? I'm not sure it does.


----------



## Architect1776 (Aug 7, 2019)

Dantana said:


> That's true, and I'd love that. But, is making less expensive lenses part of Canon's strategy? Does it make sense for them business-wise? I'm not sure it does.



Not quality of lens just leaving the mechanism out has to save money and the device has to take up room diameter wise to allow for motion and mechanical actuators. Thus far less complex and would actually be more rugged in many ways.
I do not even pretend to know canon marketing but they do have an interest in IBIS thus see the value of it and some of the monster lenses for the RF do not have IS perhaps because of the size of elements, no idea, so it can trickle down to superb smaller and lighter lenses especially in the M series.


----------



## neurorx (Aug 7, 2019)

My thoughts are consistent with many of you. I've taken my 5D3 all over the world and it's been put through very challenging conditions, taken quite the beating and never failed me. I love my EF L lenses and I am happy with all of them. I didn't make the 5D4 jump (I tried it and returned it), largely because it was not a big enough jump in tech for my needs. The posts are discussing a 1D R and a 5D high megapixel replacement, but I sure hope we see an all around camera that's an improvement over the 5D4 soon, my 5D3 before it goes DNR.


----------



## dtaylor (Aug 7, 2019)

neurorx said:


> My thoughts are consistent with many of you. I've taken my 5D3 all over the world and it's been put through very challenging conditions, taken quite the beating and never failed me. I love my EF L lenses and I am happy with all of them. I didn't make the 5D4 jump (I tried it and returned it), largely because it was not a big enough jump in tech for my needs. The posts are discussing a 1D R and a 5D high megapixel replacement, but I sure hope we see an all around camera that's an improvement over the 5D4 soon, my 5D3 before it goes DNR.



Depends on what you're looking for in terms of "improvement". For all the Internet chatter about IQ, sensor improvements have been very slow this decade because for still capture sensor tech is quite mature. DxO and DPReview want you to think about nothing but DR, yet the bar for DR was set by the D800 in 2012. People talk a lot about high ISO but there's not 1ev of difference between the best and worst FF sensors currently shipping.

Ironically the area which the press has ignored for the past few years, megapixels, is the area where there's still room for improvement. This is also the area where people seem to complain the most. Witness all the comments from people saying they don't want an 80mp FF RF body from Canon.

The next 5D and/or RF version of the 5D will surely have improved video and AI AF specs. But if you're not going for the high MP RF body that is in the pipeline then don't expect a significant IQ improvement over the 5D4 that you returned. It's state of the art, and that art is now moving at a glacial pace when it comes to still capture.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 7, 2019)

neurorx said:


> ... I sure hope we see an all around camera that's an improvement over the 5D4 soon, my 5D3 before it goes DNR.



Canon released a 5D comparable mirrorless last year. If you want something else you will likely have to wait for either the 5D V or EOS R II, neither of which are on the horizon just yet.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 8, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Canon released a 5D comparable mirrorless last year. If you want something else you will likely have to wait for either the 5D V or EOS R II, neither of which are on the horizon just yet.


Agreed, the R is very much a mirrorless 5DIV in most (but not all) respects. 

I do agree with @neurorx that the 5DIV was incremental to the 5DIII, but I think that’s true of most Canon updates. That’s why I’m happily shooting a 1D X as my main camera, and felt no strong desire to replace it with the 1D X II.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 8, 2019)

Dantana said:


> That's true, and I'd love that. But, is making less expensive lenses part of Canon's strategy? Does it make sense for them business-wise? I'm not sure it does.



I think it does. Canon may make more revenue *per unit* on high end gear, but Canon makes more revenue (and presumably profit) by selling a much larger number of units of lower cost cameras and lenses.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 8, 2019)

sdz said:


> I am thoughtful to a fault. I see more than my share of Clavins who want to set me straight about something. I have nothing to gain by debating fools.





sdz said:


> I do not have cramps. And I'm civil to a fault.



I keep having to wonder whether drinking the acid rain from back woods cisterns in the "Rust Belt" causes cramps or simply self-aggrandizement and general nastiness. It absolutely causes the Dunning-Kruger effect.


----------



## uri.raz (Aug 11, 2019)

dtaylor said:


> Ironically the area which the press has ignored for the past few years, megapixels, is the area where there's still room for improvement. This is also the area where people seem to complain the most. Witness all the comments from people saying they don't want an 80mp FF RF body from Canon.
> 
> The next 5D and/or RF version of the 5D will surely have improved video and AI AF specs. But if you're not going for the high MP RF body that is in the pipeline then don't expect a significant IQ improvement over the 5D4 that you returned.



I rarely print larger than poster. Technically, how would 80MP lead to better IQ than my 5DmkIII's 22.3MP?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 13, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> I rarely print larger than poster. Technically, how would 80MP lead to better IQ than my 5DmkIII's 22.3MP?


It will let you better sample fine details, similar to how a 5D3 leads to better IQ than a 5D.

Whether that manifests in a print is a function of more than the camera.


----------



## uri.raz (Aug 13, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> It will let you better sample fine details, similar to how a 5D3 leads to better IQ than a 5D.
> 
> Whether that manifests in a print is a function of more than the camera.



I was hoping for more technical details.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 13, 2019)

Dantana said:


> That's true, and I'd love that. But, is making less expensive lenses part of Canon's strategy? Does it make sense for them business-wise? I'm not sure it does.


Well, they made the RF 35mm f/1.8. A lot of people buying the RP will be looking for the less expensive lenses if they'd rather a native mount instead of an adapter. That's especially true if they have EF-S lenses and don't want the crop, don't you think?


----------



## Dantana (Aug 13, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Well, they made the RF 35mm f/1.8. A lot of people buying the RP will be looking for the less expensive lenses if they'd rather a native mount instead of an adapter. That's especially true if they have EF-S lenses and don't want the crop, don't you think?


True, and I'd love a whole mess of lenses like that 35.

I'm just curious if that's the best bet for Canon financially or if more expensive primes (like the other RF lenses that have come out) will make them more money in the long run. Or maybe it's both.

My point was that sure, small and inexpensive primes would be great to have. I'd love that. I just don't know if that's Canon's priority, at least from what we have seen so far.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 14, 2019)

Dantana said:


> True, and I'd love a whole mess of lenses like that 35.
> 
> I'm just curious if that's the best bet for Canon financially or if more expensive primes (like the other RF lenses that have come out) will make them more money in the long run. Or maybe it's both.
> 
> My point was that sure, small and inexpensive primes would be great to have. I'd love that. I just don't know if that's Canon's priority, at least from what we have seen so far.


It's anyones guess, I think. However, there may be a whole slew of them in the pipeline. The "wow" stuff is to generate buzz, I think... plus I believe Canon Stated that they are going to concentrate more on the high end. The current non-L EF lenses adapt perfectly with no IQ loss. A person buying an RP who already has a collection of FF EF lenses probably isn't in a hurry to upgrade. But like I said and you said, we can't be sure.


----------



## Dantana (Aug 14, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> It's anyones guess, I think. However, there may be a whole slew of them in the pipeline. The "wow" stuff is to generate buzz, I think... plus I believe Canon Stated that they are going to concentrate more on the high end. The current non-L EF lenses adapt perfectly with no IQ loss. A person buying an RP who already has a collection of FF EF lenses probably isn't in a hurry to upgrade. But like I said and you said, we can't be sure.


Yes, I guess it's true that we don't know what will be released, and there could be a whole mess of them.

It's great to hear that EF lenses adapt perfectly (as they should). I know that I will be using my existing lenses other than probably the kit lens when I do decide to take the plunge on the RF system. I was tempted by the RP because of the price. The viewfinder on the R and the fact that I already have a few compatible batteries has me leaning toward the original. It may be a while though as I am still trying to get over the cost of a wedding and honeymoon in the last few months. It gives me time to read the takes of people who have already made the switch.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 14, 2019)

Dantana said:


> Yes, I guess it's true that we don't know what will be released, and there could be a whole mess of them.
> 
> It's great to hear that EF lenses adapt perfectly (as they should). I know that I will be using my existing lenses other than probably the kit lens when I do decide to take the plunge on the RF system. I was tempted by the RP because of the price. The viewfinder on the R and the fact that I already have a few compatible batteries has me leaning toward the original. It may be a while though as I am still trying to get over the cost of a wedding and honeymoon in the last few months. It gives me time to read the takes of people who have already made the switch.


Congratulations! I got married on my 19th birthday. She had just turned 17 a month before. Been married 37 years (1982) and it was the best thing I ever did. Total cost of the wedding, reception, photos, and honeymoon, which consisted of three nights in a mom and pop motel for the 1982 World's Fair in Knoxville, Tennessee was about $800. We ate peanut and banana sandwiches, Tom's potato chips, Moon Pies, and RC Colas the entire honeymoon. She grew up dirt poor in the Tennessee back woods and had never been more than 15 miles from home in her whole life. They still had an outhouse (a two hole luxury type), and got their water from a spigot in the yard and ran a hose inside to fill the bathtub and sinks. Every light in the house was the pull chain type. No switches. So she was real happy. She spent her last year of high school as a married woman. We went to her senior prom as husband and wife.  Growing up so poor, she never wants to spend money on herself. Never has had a manicure or pedicure. She does all that herself, but she indulges me. Waits on me hand and foot. I don't ask for that and she always says, "Yes sir and no sir" to me when we talk.

My brothers both spent over $20,000 on their weddings.

I can highly recommend the R and the upcoming firmware update will make it even better.

EDIT: Our reception took place in the basement of the church. We served cake, a bowl of peanuts, and a bowl of Hawaiian punch.


----------



## 100 (Aug 15, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> I was hoping for more technical details.


An FF sensor is 36mm on the long side.
The 5D III has 5784 pixels on the long side, one pixel has a length of 36/5784 = 0.00622mm.
If you print 900mm (3 feet) on the long side your details will be 25x bigger. 
The smallest detail (in theory) will be 0.16mm.
A human eye can see detail as small as about 0.1mm so we are pretty close to that already.
An 80mp sensor will have about 11,000 pixels on the long side. The smallest detail in that case will be 0.08mm, just below what a human eye can see.

You need a perfect sensor, a perfect lens, a perfect vacuum and keep the camera perfectly still to get that kind of detail, so in reality the smallest detail you’ll capture will be bigger. You will be able to see the difference in detail between a 22mp and 80mp FF sensor when printed poster size if you look closely, but at a normal viewing distance the difference will probably be insignificant.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 15, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> It will let you better sample fine details, similar to how a 5D3 leads to better IQ than a 5D.
> 
> Whether that manifests in a print is a function of more than the camera.


I think it could also help with poorly composed photos that can be heavily cropped to make up for poor composition. I would probably never buy one, but there have been many times in fashion work that if I had the ability to crop huge files, single photos could be composed to have many different looks and still be printed large afterwards. Plus, I could then always keep my camera in landscape position.  The argument against it, in my opinion, is holding the thing still enough to get a good photo. That and the computer and hard drive investment that would go along with it.


----------



## BillB (Aug 15, 2019)

Dantana said:


> True, and I'd love a whole mess of lenses like that 35.
> 
> I'm just curious if that's the best bet for Canon financially or if more expensive primes (like the other RF lenses that have come out) will make them more money in the long run. Or maybe it's both.
> 
> My point was that sure, small and inexpensive primes would be great to have. I'd love that. I just don't know if that's Canon's priority, at least from what we have seen so far.


My guess is that Canon makes much more from the sale of zoom lenses that it does from primes. As zoom lenses have gotten better, I think that fewer primes are being sold.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Aug 15, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Tell me again about when Sony passed Canon in terms of total ILC sales and ILC market share. I seem to have missed that announcement.


If total market share is important to you that's fine. I don't see how that's any more relevant to meeting my equipment needs than knowing which mega-corp sells the most cheeseburgers or shampoo. But, if going along with the crowd makes you feel warm and fuzzy then that's what you should do.

Canon's market share is inflated by sales of consumer camera's that don't really interest me. Canon can put t7's in crackerjack boxes and McDonald's Happy Meals for all I care. I judge camera's on their technical merits and ability to meet my needs, not their popularity.

edit: The relevant point I was trying to make is that everything Canon has done in the last five years has been in response to pressure from Sony's Alpha's. Despite being the market leader in sales, when it comes to tech they are following, not leading.

Does anybody believe Canon would have released the R bodies and RF lenses were it not for Sony's Alpha series hogging all the positive press for the last five years.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 15, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> that everything Canon has done in the last five years has been in response to pressure from Sony's Alpha's.



Certainly untrue. Reduce your scope significantly from everything, and then you’ll achieve a maybe.



Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Does anybody believe Canon would have released the R bodies and RF lenses were it not for Sony's Alpha series hogging all the positive press for the last five years.



I expect they react more to their own market research than competitor press.


----------



## BillB (Aug 15, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> edit: The relevant point I was trying to make is that everything Canon has done in the last five years has been in response to pressure from Sony's Alpha's. Despite being the market leader in sales, when it comes to tech they are following, not leading.
> 
> Does anybody believe Canon would have released the R bodies and RF lenses were it not for Sony's Alpha series hogging all the positive press for the last five years.



People believe lots of things that are not true. We will never know what Canon might have done or might not have done if Sony had not produced the Alpha series.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 15, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Canon's market share is inflated by sales of consumer camera's that don't really interest me.


It's not "inflated". In the era of smartphones, Canon still manages to sell cameras that interest people, and does it better than any other manufacturer.



Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Canon can put t7's in crackerjack boxes and McDonald's Happy Meals for all I care.


That would be quite expensive boxes.



Graphic.Artifacts said:


> I judge camera's on their technical merits and ability to meet my needs, not their popularity.


That's how tools _earn_ their popularity. If you are in minority there, you can as well be in minority here.



Graphic.Artifacts said:


> edit: The relevant point I was trying to make is that everything Canon has done in the last five years has been in response to pressure from Sony's Alpha's.


Isn't that a kind of... well, overstatement?

Did Canon, for instance, develop and publish CCAPI in response to pressure from Sony's Alphas? If so, which kind of pressure in particular, given that Sony is still not shipping a camera that supports WiFi tethering (in a legitimate way, I mean)?


----------



## stevelee (Aug 15, 2019)

Canon’s market share is “inflated” by selling a lot of cameras.  If they didn’t cheat by selling so many cameras, their market share would be smaller. How dare they!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 15, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> If total market share is important to you that's fine. I don't see how that's any more relevant to meeting my equipment needs than knowing which mega-corp sells the most cheeseburgers or shampoo. But, if going along with the crowd makes you feel warm and fuzzy then that's what you should do.
> 
> Canon's market share is inflated by sales of consumer camera's that don't really interest me. Canon can put t7's in crackerjack boxes and McDonald's Happy Meals for all I care. I judge camera's on their technical merits and ability to meet my needs, not their popularity.


It’s too bad for you that Canon doesn’t really care about your personal needs. Out of curiosity, are you enjoying your Sony camera(s) and lenses?


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 15, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> If total market share is important to you that's fine. I don't see how that's any more relevant to meeting my equipment needs than knowing which mega-corp sells the most cheeseburgers or shampoo. But, if going along with the crowd makes you feel warm and fuzzy then that's what you should do.
> 
> Canon's market share is inflated by sales of consumer camera's that don't really interest me. Canon can put t7's in crackerjack boxes and McDonald's Happy Meals for all I care. I judge camera's on their technical merits and ability to meet my needs, not their popularity.
> 
> ...



I guess that's why Canon introduced Dual Pixel AF for video recording. Because Sony already had it, right?



Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Plenty to like about Canon and plenty to dislike about Sony but if you can't appreciate the extent to which Sony is driving camera tech forward I don't know what to tell you. Canon is the world's largest camera company with decades of experience and for the most part they have been chasing Sony's tail for the last several years. It's a little sad.
> 
> Canon's cameras, like pretty much every camera made in the last decade or so, still produce fine images but the tech gap is widening every day. I understand why that gets on some peoples nerves but it's not Sony's fault that Canon isn't keeping up.



Both Canon and Sony exist as entities because they wish to sell products in order to generate a profit. If that goal includes meeting your individual desires in a camera, I'm sure they are fine with that. But pleasing you is not the sole reason for their existence.

When someone says "Company A has been chasing Company B's tail for the last several years" then it must be assumed one is talking about making money and market share. That's why Company A and Company B do what they do: to make money.

But beyond that...




dtaylor said:


> Sony has driven things forward in some respects. But a lot of the 'forward drive' in Sony's products has actually been spent chasing Canon's tail along with the tail of every mature DSLR manufacturer. It's easy to look at the A7 series and see four generations of improvement while forgetting that it was the _third_ _generation_ before the AF could compete with SLR AF, as but one example. It's also easy to forget all the sensor imaging problems Sony has had over these generations. Off sensor flare, compressed RAW artifacts, star eaters, striping. And do I dare mention ergonomics and weather sealing?
> 
> These things are fresh in my memory because I carefully researched and considered buying every single A7R released. And every time there was a 'show stopper' issue that would have killed it for me even if I otherwise would have gone Sony. In a twist of irony, I _finally gave up waiting for Sony to catch up_ and moved to the 5Ds.
> 
> Sony is a competitive force which is ultimately good for everyone. But it's grating to hear over and over again how far ahead they are based on a selected subset of considerations which happen to play to their strengths.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 15, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> edit: The relevant point I was trying to make is that everything Canon has done in the last five years has been in response to pressure from Sony's Alpha's. Despite being the market leader in sales, when it comes to tech they are following, not leading.
> 
> Does anybody believe Canon would have released the R bodies and RF lenses were it not for Sony's Alpha series hogging all the positive press for the last five years.


So in your mind, the tail wags the dog. Nice. 

Sony’s ILC market share was stagnant from 2009 to 2017 (they gained a whole 3% in 2018, but not from Canon), and EOS R development cycle started before 2017. Positive press that doesn’t affect sales is irrelevant.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 16, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> ...Does anybody believe Canon would have released the R bodies and RF lenses were it not for Sony's Alpha series hogging all the positive press for the last five years.



I absolutely do. It was only a matter of time and technological development before camera manufacturers began incorporating video into camera viewfinders. (Which, after all, is the main feature of mirrorless cameras.) Anyone could have seen that was the trajectory camera manufacturers were on once digital cameras were introduced. The introduction of Live View was key precursor. Indeed, I remember having discussions to that effect way more than five years ago on this very forum. At the time, the consensus was that the technology was not sufficiently mature enough to satisfy the needs of professionals and enthusiasts.

I bought my wife a Nikon superzoom point and shoot more than 10 years ago that had a workable but mediocre electronic viewfinder. Those early point and shoots were the testing ground for mirrorless cameras and all the brands have been refining the technology ever since. 

Yes, Sony was the most aggressive and first to the market with enthusiast level mirrorless cameras, but it was inevitable that Nikon and Canon would get into the market. Remember that Sony went all-in on mirrorless out of necessity, since they couldn't compete against Nikon and Canon on the DSLR front. It was a smart move on Sony's part and it enabled them to capture a large share of the market in the early years. It remains to be seen if they can sustain that.

An alternative view would be that Nikon and Canon let Sony take the initial risk and become the beta tester, while they sat back and perfected their systems. 

Main point is: crediting Sony with driving the market is a bit of a stretch since none of us has access to either Canon's or Nikon's corporate strategy.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 16, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Yes, Sony was the most aggressive and first to the market with enthusiast level mirrorless cameras,



Were they? Or were they merely first with a full frame digital mirrorless camera?


----------



## unfocused (Aug 16, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Were they? Or were they merely first with a full frame digital mirrorless camera?


Well, I guess if you are the first, you are by definition the most aggressive since it's easy to be more aggressive than nothing. But, I get your point.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 16, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Well, I guess if you are the first, you are by definition the most aggressive since it's easy to be more aggressive than nothing. But, I get your point.


In fairness I don’t really know who built the first mirrorless digital ILC.


----------



## Bennymiata (Aug 16, 2019)

Leica was probably the first ILC mirrorless camera, but they used film and not sensors.

There's nothing much that's new, just new combinations of existing tech.

I have an M5, but I still like looking through the OVF of my 5d3 much more, but I do understand why some prefer an EVF.
However, if you have skill and experience, an EVF just doesn't cut it like an OVF.
Just my 2c.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 16, 2019)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Canon's market share is inflated by sales of consumer camera's that don't really interest me.


Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, etc are dominated by sales of low end consumer cameras. That's where the sales and the money are.


----------



## Phil Indeblanc (Aug 16, 2019)

Using both the A7RII and the 5DMarkIII....
If Canon cannot provide a fast focus system as 5Dm3 or better, and improve sensor performance with a hybrid like EVF/OVF with at least the option to shoot in 30mp, or 50mp or so, then they should not bother releasing anything. The megapixels is just for people who think that number is the end all, and we all know it is far from that, and least important. But, there are so many newbie shooters, and all the X pro shooters who used to make money shooting, are now "influencers", so the marketing has changed, and so have the bulk of users.

I don't hear many others gripe about the issues I have had with the Sony A7RII, the in camera previews are horrible long lag(zoom 1:1 and change pictures is bad.), the electronics often can use a ON/OFF to reset and recognize the lens, and the same for flash triggers. Menus suck, but have great customization that helps. I dont have any of these issues with the 5DM3. Yet there is no talk about if these problems are present. There are very FEW Pros on YT that discuss the issues with Sony, and they are lost under all the positives, which the sensor is.

After getting an LGrip that extends, I have no ergo issues with the A7RI and ditched the battery grip. The lens release location is thoughtless, as its you index or middle finger support to hold up the camera with 1 hand...at least for my ergo.
Also, the fact is, I dont want to get a new 180macroL, or a 100mm macro, or a 70-200 ISL, or a super wide, Or the other adpaters I seldom used but paid stupid Novoflex prices for. Its been some time that I have even pulled out my Phase One back, as the Sony is doing fine in the studio and is almost equal in pixels, but faster, and more options. With so much less "big" jobs for us freelancers, there is no time or budget for a MF like the PhaseOnes. But maybe Fuji 50 MF maybe or when the price of the 100 MF is around $6 to 7? WHo knows...it STILL doesn't help me make more income...As photography is rarely ever about the system used. But tools that are more TRANSPARENT so we have less fiddling with to capture our vision or clients projects.

It would be amazing if Canon made a head mount camera with a monocle style viewfind over the eye, and the rest of the unit would be behind the head and tethered to a waist belt. Its shocking we dont have this yet! Not really Google glasses, but a real camer system that has a hand remote, or gesture trigger. We are in 2020 in a few months, and the system is holding soooo much tech back, and only bleeding it out as we bleed out the money for tiny changes.

I have no idea why Canon made the R series. Waste of time really, and people say how the autofocus is no good for quick response. What?? How does technology back pedal unless its a horrible idea? 

We need a 5D MarkV
With:
True optional AA filter
50mpixels+ with options for less
Multi pixel shift shooting for larger files that can be previewed, and layered in post
Maybe better display of seeing our settings with OLED or phosphor ink or something.
Touch screen focus, and all the features the 5Dm4 has and MORE
(I honestly think 4K video is great, but DON'T CARE! I use a differnt system for it, and it should be fine this way. I agree you shouldn't need a $5-10K camera for it.)
NO NEW LENS MOUNT, UNLESS it was going to be hybrid with a LARGER format, like medium format body? Otherwise, WHY?
More compact is not a bad direction, but has to be no cost of battery or feature sets
I wish we could alos have an optional IR filter with the sensor being sensitive to IR light.

Why I LOVE the Sony A7RII
I can see when it focuses with the little green dots
I can focus with EVF by zooming in, and can do WYSIWYG in the VF
Macro shooting in studio is so easy and nice with the zoom and manual focus or auto
I like it being compact
Screen articulation, although a full flip would help so much better with Real estate, so I use a rig with external monitor.
I like the number of buttons I can custom map

A few other things I didn't mention above that I dont like...
I already sent it in for repair sometime ago for the SD card slot, the USB connection, the mount being sloppy, and general electronics glitches. Even now it still is picky on the cards I use, as it just doesnt like Transcend or PNY high speed cards. This is unacceptable.


----------



## bwud (Aug 17, 2019)

Phil Indeblanc said:


> Using both the A7RII and the 5DMarkIII....



I used an A7R ii for two years, and currently use an A7R iii and a 5D iii.



Phil Indeblanc said:


> Why I LOVE the Sony A7RII
> 
> I can see when it focuses with the little green dots



Yes, unfortunately, like traditional PDAF, it often doesn’t focus where it says it will (especially when the subject is moving towards the camera).



Phil Indeblanc said:


> I ... can do WYSIWYG in the VF



I disagree. You can see your composition and depth of field, but you don’t even get default JPG color space (take a photo of a vibrant scene and then immediately replay it while looking in the VF; without fail the replay looks different - typically better), and you have a very limited contrast ratio + a screen which is adjusting brightness for ambient conditions at the camera (as opposed to where the camera is pointing), which in my experience often leads to underexposure if not using the histogram or meter to adjust exposure settings.


----------



## Phil Indeblanc (Aug 17, 2019)

Well, I know its not so accurate, but at least being able to focus in low light is surely a plus.
So, maybe you can help....Is the 1 to 1 zoom on the R3 the same or significantly faster and close to the 5Dm3 or even better?


----------



## bwud (Aug 17, 2019)

Phil Indeblanc said:


> Well, I know its not so accurate, but at least being able to focus in low light is surely a plus.
> So, maybe you can help....Is the 1 to 1 zoom on the R3 the same or significantly faster and close to the 5Dm3 or even better?



I don’t rightly know; it has been a long time since I’ve used live view on my 5D. To me the VF experience is significantly better than the rear screen experience, though, so I imagine I’d prefer doing it with my a7r iii.

I very much like zoom in the EVF on the Sony body. My only complaint is the requirement to switch to manual focus first. I have a button mapped to switch to MF just so that I can press my button mapped to zoom. Seems intuitive that if I am zooming I want to focus manually. That’s one thing I’ve never quite understood about Sony - it seems senseless.


----------



## Phil Indeblanc (Aug 20, 2019)

Listening to a review, I think it was 3 Elephants or something on Youtube, his verbage of the feature for the A7RIV is that it can zoom in during Auto. So they might have finally "fixed" that limitation.

What I descrive in the EVF is more so for the fact you are not looking at a black VF(not screen). So when dark with flash, you can compose. 

Lets just hope Canon is going to be serious and do something meaningful. Not like this R series stuff they pulled recently.


----------



## sdz (Aug 20, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I keep having to wonder whether drinking the acid rain from back woods cisterns in the "Rust Belt" causes cramps or simply self-aggrandizement and general nastiness. It absolutely causes the Dunning-Kruger effect.



Hmmm, you sport class biases as well.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 20, 2019)

sdz said:


> Hmmm, you sport class biases as well.


Not at all. It's just that you don't have any. Money wise, I am probably the poorest person on these boards. But that isn't the type of class we are talking about.


----------



## sdz (Aug 20, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Not at all. It's just that you don't have any. Money wise, I am probably the poorest person on these boards. But that isn't the type of class we are talking about.



I do not believe you know what a social class is. I'd tell you the various definitions for the term, but what good would that do?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 20, 2019)

sdz said:


> I do not believe you know what a social class is. I'd tell you the various definitions for the term, but what good would that do?


An ironic question given that your ‘contributions’ (and I use the term pejoratively) to this thread have been the antithesis of good.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 20, 2019)

sdz said:


> I do not believe you know what a social class is. I'd tell you the various definitions for the term, but what good would that do?


I know what social classes are and know where I'm at. The bottom. I have just a high school diploma. I worked in factories most of my life as a self taught electronics and instrumentation technician.. I served in the Hawaii Army National Guard, Tennessee Army National Guard, and then went through boot camp again for a hitch in the USMC attached to the 3rd MAW. I drove 18 wheelers for 9 years and have about 1.5 million miles in my back pocket. My first three homes were very small mobile homes. The biggest was 13x52 ft. In fact, they are the only homes I ever owned. I now live in a 1 bedroom apt. of about 650 sq. ft. right under the flight path of DFW airport, and raise my grandson. I live on just $1,600 a month due to cognitive decline. I have what I have in photo gear because I have sold things I acquired when I was still able to earn a decent living. My photo gear is all I own with any value at all. So spare me your self-righteousness. Again, you have no class... and I don't mean a social class/status that money can buy. I mean something you obviously know nothing about. Yet, somehow even with my cognitive problems I can still wipe the floor with you intellectually. I used to be a pretty smart guy. Now I'm just a dumbass who can't learn Lightroom/Photoshop. So where does that leave you? Even dumber than I.


----------



## sdz (Aug 20, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> An ironic question given that your ‘contributions’ (and I use the term pejoratively) to this thread have been the antithesis of good.



Another red hering.


----------



## sdz (Aug 20, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I know what social classes are and know where I'm at. The bottom. I have just a high school diploma. I worked in factories most of my life as a self taught electronics and instrumentation technician.. I served in the Hawaii Army National Guard, Tennessee Army National Guard, and then went through boot camp again for a hitch in the USMC attached to the 3rd MAW. I drove 18 wheelers for 9 years and have about 1.5 million miles in my back pocket. My first three homes were very small mobile homes. The biggest was 13x52 ft. In fact, they are the only homes I ever owned. I now live in a 1 bedroom apt. of about 650 sq. ft. right under the flight path of DFW airport, and raise my grandson. I live on just $1,600 a month due to cognitive decline. I have what I have in photo gear because I have sold things I acquired when I was still able to earn a decent living. My photo gear is all I own with any value at all. So spare me your self-righteousness. Again, you have no class... and I don't mean money. I mean something you obviously know nothing about. Yet, somehow even with my cognitive problems I can still wipe the floor with you intellectually. I used to be a pretty smart guy. Now I'm just a dumbass who can't learn Lightroom/Photoshop. So where does that leave you? Even dumber than I.



You exhibited class bias. Own it.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 20, 2019)

sdz said:


> You exhibited class bias. Own it.


You really are dense. Tell me, Eisenstein, why would I be biased against the very class I am a part of? My bias is against you... personally.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 20, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> An ironic question given that your ‘contributions’ (and I use the term pejoratively) to this thread have been the antithesis of good.



Neuro, Antithesis of good.. is that a thesis of antigood or an antigood of thesis?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 20, 2019)

sdz said:


> I'll end this conversation now.



Apparently not. I wonder if it’s poor memory or a lack of willpower. Or both. 



sdz said:


> Another red hering.



It was an observation, not an attempt to mislead anyone. Another observation is that you don’t know what a red herring is, or even how to spell it correctly.


----------



## YuengLinger (Aug 20, 2019)

Was it the "CROWN" in the thread title that triggered class warfare?


----------



## sdz (Aug 20, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Apparently not. I wonder if it’s poor memory or a lack of willpower. Or both.
> 
> 
> 
> It was an observation, not an attempt to mislead anyone. Another observation is that you don’t know what a red herring is, or even how to spell it correctly.



The classism shocked me. I broke discipline because of that.


----------



## sdz (Aug 20, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> You really are dense. Tell me, Eisenstein, why would I be biased against the very class I am a part of? My bias is against you... personally.



Self hatred -- it's not uncomon. So, like I said before, own your prejudices. Reject hipocrisy.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 20, 2019)

sdz said:


> Self hatred -- it's not uncomon. So, like I said before, own your prejudices. Reject hipocrisy.


Blah, blah, blah. BTW: Spell check is your friend, maybe. I reject your pseudo PC hypocrisy. Run along now. Your mama is calling you. I have nothing to gain by argueing with fools.


sdz said:


> I am thoughtful to a fault. I see more than my share of Clavins who want to set me straight about something. I have nothing to gain by debating fools.





sdz said:


> I do not have cramps. And I'm civil to a fault.



Ignored.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 20, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I know what social classes are and know where I'm at. The bottom. I have just a high school diploma. I worked in factories most of my life as a self taught electronics and instrumentation technician.. I served in the Hawaii Army National Guard, Tennessee Army National Guard, and then went through boot camp again for a hitch in the USMC attached to the 3rd MAW. I drove 18 wheelers for 9 years and have about 1.5 million miles in my back pocket. My first three homes were very small mobile homes. The biggest was 13x52 ft. In fact, they are the only homes I ever owned. I now live in a 1 bedroom apt. of about 650 sq. ft. right under the flight path of DFW airport, and raise my grandson. I live on just $1,600 a month due to cognitive decline. I have what I have in photo gear because I have sold things I acquired when I was still able to earn a decent living. My photo gear is all I own with any value at all. So spare me your self-righteousness. Again, you have no class... and I don't mean a social class/status that money can buy. I mean something you obviously know nothing about. Yet, somehow even with my cognitive problems I can still wipe the floor with you intellectually. I used to be a pretty smart guy. Now I'm just a dumbass who can't learn Lightroom/Photoshop. So where does that leave you? Even dumber than I.



Yes, but you have class! Even when I don't agree with you, I still have to listen to what you have to say and think about it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 10, 2019)

I'd guess that the 70MP sensor was the one they were going to put in the 5DS/R MkII and the 83MP one is a new sensor from the same fabrication line as the new 90D and M6 MkII line. 

If they go with the 70MP it will be to claw back some of the R&D spent on that singular use sensor and the RS MkI will have a logical 2 year upgrade cycle and have annoying feature absences. If they are brave and forward looking it will be off the new fabrication line and be the 83MP sensor that will be used for years and will push back a MkII, but it will cost more.

Knowing Canon's business history I'd bet on a 70MP version but I'd like to be proven wrong.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 11, 2019)

sdz said:


> Self hatred -- it's not uncomon.



I doubt that. Self hatred has to be a rare pathology. What you’re describing sounds nore like social-driven guilt.


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 11, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I'd guess that the 70MP sensor was the one they were going to put in the 5DS/R MkII and the 83MP one is a new sensor from the same fabrication line as the new 90D and M6 MkII line.
> 
> If they go with the 70MP it will be to claw back some of the R&D spent on that singular use sensor and the RS MkI will have a logical 2 year upgrade cycle and have annoying feature absences. If they are brave and forward looking it will be off the new fabrication line and be the 83MP sensor that will be used for years and will push back a MkII, but it will cost more.
> 
> Knowing Canon's business history I'd bet on a 70MP version but I'd like to be proven wrong.


Depending on that 70MP sensor being DPAF type or not. Plus readout speed as a consideration.


----------



## sdz (Sep 15, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> I doubt that. Self hatred has to be a rare pathology. What you’re describing sounds nore like social-driven guilt.



You only need to know what to look for to spot self-hatred. Watch the arrogant person, who seems to love themselves, descend into self-loathing when reality fails to affirm their self-conception. See minorities ape the dominant class or culture. Most individuals are socially and politically weak. They have many opportunities for experiencing their lesser status in the world. Guilt has less to do with self-hatred than shame. The pain of a shame-addled person reflects their sense of having a damaged or spoiled identity. Malignant persons exploit the shame-addled to realize their power by shaming the already shamed individual.

This stuff is so common it passes as unremarkable.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 16, 2019)

sdz said:


> You only need to know what to look for to spot self-hatred. Watch the arrogant person, who seems to love themselves, descend into self-loathing when reality fails to affirm their self-conception. See minorities ape the dominant class or culture. Most individuals are socially and politically weak. They have many opportunities for experiencing their lesser status in the world. Guilt has less to do with self-hatred than shame. The pain of a shame-addled person reflects their sense of having a damaged or spoiled identity. Malignant persons exploit the shame-addled to realize their power by shaming the already shamed individual.
> 
> This stuff is so common it passes as unremarkable.


Whether guilt or shame, I expect most of it is derived socially, not internally.


----------



## sdz (Sep 16, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> Whether guilt or shame, I expect most of it is derived socially, not internally.



It's unclear to me why the the internal/external distinction matters. It is still an affect the subject experiences in the first person. When an individual learns something, he or she internalizes what they learn. He or she makes it his or her own matter. That's why self-hatred is hatred directed towards the self. It does not originate from the other or the world even if we were to consider social conditions the first cause of this hatred.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 16, 2019)

sdz said:


> It's unclear to me why the the internal/external distinction matters. It is still an affect the subject experiences in the first person. When an individual learns something, he or she internalizes what they learn. He or she makes it his or her own matter. That's why self-hatred is hatred directed towards the self. It does not originate from the other or the world even if we were to consider social conditions the first cause of this hatred.


My thought was that something socially-inspired is more easily deflected and corrected.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 16, 2019)

Does DPP or ACR correct for this?


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 16, 2019)

SecureGSM said:


> Depending on that 70MP sensor being DPAF type or not. Plus readout speed as a consideration.



We had the 7D2 come out with a 20Mpixel sensor, closely followed by a 5Ds/r with that sensor scaled up to 50MP. Many of us are betting that the same thing will happen with the 90D sensor, and a FF version of it at 83Mpixels.

Of course time will tell, and there is is a very distinct possibility that all of us are wrong


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 16, 2019)

What I meant to say is: that 70mp prototype sensor mentioned in the post I have referenced above is not a DPAF enabled prototype in my understanding. I do not believe that Canon would consider a high res non DPAF sensor in a high end FF camera at this stage.
83mp sensor is likely a DPAF tech enabled.


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 17, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I'd guess that the 70MP sensor was the one they were going to put in the 5DS/R MkII and the 83MP one is a new sensor from the same fabrication line as the new 90D and M6 MkII line.
> 
> If they go with the 70MP it will be to claw back some of the R&D spent on that singular use sensor and the RS MkI will have a logical 2 year upgrade cycle and have annoying feature absences. If they are brave and forward looking it will be off the new fabrication line and be the 83MP sensor that will be used for years and will push back a MkII, but it will cost more.
> 
> Knowing Canon's business history I'd bet on a 70MP version but I'd like to be proven wrong.



Or maybe they could use the fabrication for the 70 MP FF sensor to make a 27 MP APS-C sensor? Possible uses would be for future Rebels or maybe even a "fast" sports/action camera with either EF-M of RF mount?


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 17, 2019)

sdz said:


> It's unclear to me why the the internal/external distinction matters. It is still an affect the subject experiences in the first person. When an individual learns something, he or she internalizes what they learn. He or she makes it his or her own matter. That's why self-hatred is hatred directed towards the self. It does not originate from the other or the world even if we were to consider social conditions the first cause of this hatred.



Which begs the question: Which is more detestable, self-hatred or total lack of empathy?

P.S. Don't let the effect affect you. (Hint: Affect is a verb. Effect is a noun.)


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> Which begs the question: Which is more detestable, self-hatred or total lack of empathy?
> 
> P.S. Don't let the effect affect you. (Hint: Affect is a verb. Effect is a noun.)



Ah, it's the the fool who self identifies with the man-child sex offender!

Ignorant too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affect_(psychology)?wprov=sfla1 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question?wprov=sfla1


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2019)

3kramd5 said:


> My thought was that something socially-inspired is more easily deflected and corrected.



If only it were that easy. Habits -- including habits of mind and psyche -- are hard to master. Humans are not that rational.


----------



## scottkinfw (Sep 17, 2019)

How many MP are enough MP?


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2019)

scottkinfw said:


> How many MP are enough MP?



Is there ever enough?


----------



## Aussie shooter (Sep 17, 2019)

scottkinfw said:


> How many MP are enough MP?


Enough?8-10 In most use cases. 
Too many? No such thing.
As long as our computing power is capable of dealing with the amount of information then you can't have too much detail can you?


----------



## Michael Clark (Sep 17, 2019)

sdz said:


> Ah, it's the the fool who self identifies with the man-child sex offender!
> 
> Ignorant too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affect_(psychology)?wprov=sfla1 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question?wprov=sfla1


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 17, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> We had the 7D2 come out with a 20Mpixel sensor, closely followed by a 5Ds/r with that sensor scaled up to 50MP. Many of us are betting that the same thing will happen with the 90D sensor, and a FF version of it at 83Mpixels.
> 
> Of course time will tell, and there is is a very distinct possibility that all of us are wrong



The 7d2 has DPAF, the 5ds hasn't, so it isn't the same sensor.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2019)

Mature is both an adjective and a verb. A quick perusal of recent posts suggests that @Michael Clark and @sdz are not accurately described by the former use, and would both benefit from attempting to engage in the latter use of the word.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 17, 2019)

koenkooi said:


> The 7d2 has DPAF, the 5ds hasn't, so it isn't the same sensor.


You are right! One learns something every day here!


----------



## sdz (Sep 17, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Mature is both an adjective and a verb. A quick perusal of recent posts suggests that @Michael Clark and @sdz are not accurately described by the former use, and would both benefit from attempting to engage in the latter use of the word.



Well, thank you. It really helps to have a Church Lady to keep order when calm erupts.


----------



## Danpbphoto (Mar 1, 2020)

Where do I pre order?


----------



## Mike27713 (Mar 3, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


I'll jump on any manufacturer's ship that produces a full frame high megapixel DSLR. Screw Canon's mirrorless.


----------

