Canon’s big announcements coming the third week of July

[DonaldS]

Buy Nikon

Nikon is dying a slow death. They mostly use Sony sensors and after several years are only now catching up with Sony and Canon. What could they offer Canon ?

 

[EricN]

Canon did add an Apple mode to their cameras with the R7 and newer, it works very well with Camera connect, no more wifi needed.

In the settings menu on the camera you can pick PTP (aka the mode you’re used to), UVC (webcam mode) and iPhone. The R7 has a half baked implementation, the R8 has a much more complete one.

For android Canon has a thing for the new flash shoe, I don’t know what it does, just that it likely does nothing for my phone

I'm surprised and pleased they have done this! Thank you for mentioning it.

 

[HarryFilm]

Don't worry about megapixel count or high frame rates, set a higher shutter speed. For Skiing, basketball and hockey, i usually shoot at 1/800th of a second with my ISO setting at 1600 ISO to get more light sensitivity to compensate for that faster shutter speed. It gives me a tiny bit more noise in the image BUT i got a good denoiser to cleanup my final images since I usually shoot FULL RAW at 14 bits per per RGB pixel colour channel for best image quality reasons.

Canon, Sony and Nikon can ALL handle fast shutter speeds for sports and action imagery so higher megapixel counts are not that big of a deal PLUS as a photographer you SHOULD ALREADY have anticipated the action in order to frame your shot. You can always use a Fractal Resizer or Lanczos-3/5/7/9 convolution-based image resampler to export whatever megapixel count final image file you want!

I did a lot of high level hockey video back in the day (i.e. centre ice and cornerboards camera) so you LEARN to READ a game and the specific athlete to better frame your shots be it for stills OR video! High Megapixel counts and fast frame rates are a crutch for people who CAN'T READ the flow of action in order to better anticipate and frame your best sports/wildlife/high-action shots!

V

 

[scyrene]

Not true. Editorial photographers want the bigger file size to give them the opportunity to crop into their images more. When you are shooting unpredictable events such as news and sports you cannot always fill the frame with your subject due to being stuck in a fixed spot and not able to move, the unpredictability of your subject or the limitations of using a fixed prime lens such as a 400mm lens and unable to zoom in any more. All staff Associated Press photographers recently switched from using Canon to now all shooting with Sony, and AFP are using Nikon. With the photographers using the equivalent pro versions of the Sony and Nikon cameras having twice the file size to work with, they will be able to crop into and distribute images that photographers using the R1 just won't be able to do, putting the R1 user at a pretty big disadvantage in a very competitive environment. Especially at the upcoming Olympics!

Humouring you... what would your explanation be? After all this time the market leader decided to go against the desires of their perceived customer base for this body? Clearly they have higher resolution sensors. So the decision to go with 24MP (which you have claimed is definite) must be deliberate. Why?

 

[Del Paso]

Humouring you... what would your explanation be? After all this time the market leader decided to go against the desires of their perceived customer base for this body? Clearly they have higher resolution sensors. So the decision to go with 24MP (which you have claimed is definite) must be deliberate. Why?

Because Canon are stupid and internet keyboard engineers always know better!
Edit: I forgot the trolls...

 

[koenkooi]

I'm surprised and pleased they have done this! Thank you for mentioning it.

For people wanting to use it on an iDevice with lightning: it only works with the discontinued Anker cable, Canon does still sell it on their website for around €25.

USB-C iDevices just work with a usb-c data cable.

 

[koenkooi]

Humouring you... what would your explanation be? After all this time the market leader decided to go against the desires of their perceived customer base for this body? Clearly they have higher resolution sensors. So the decision to go with 24MP (which you have claimed is definite) must be deliberate. Why?

Both things can be true. The decision was almost certainly deliberate and the R1 will likely sell and perform as expected. Simultaneously, a theoretical R1 with 45MP could’ve sold better, be disliked by the sports shooters but also loved by wildlife people.

I’ve worked on products where the company deliberately targeted a certain market and also deliberately ignored a bigger, but different market. The products were still deemed successful, but could’ve been even more successful.
You can have all the market research in the world, but if the boss says “we aren’t going to sell to that market”, you aren’t going be able to design for that market

 

[HarryFilm]

Because Canon are stupid and internet keyboard engineers always know better!

Way back in the days of 2012 Canon made a monsterous 440 megapixel image sensor (25,700 x 17,142 pixels) in larger than full frame formats which was used for satellite imaging so in 2024 Canon can EASILY put such a sensor in a future R5-X series if they wanted to.

Yes! It would shoot at 10 fps but for landscapes and cropping deeeeeep into action shots, it would be a photo-capture monster of a camera!

In 2023, Samsung started development on their 220 mp, 300 mp and 400+ megapixel sensors which will go into a set of premium smartphones with the first one-inch image sensor size series ever built into a smartphone!

Those are scheduled to come into market by first quarter 2026! Their press announcement about this was made last year! So if Samsung can put a 400 megapixel NATIVE RESOLUTION image sensor into a smartphone, then Canon can put a 64 megapixel 120 fps image sensor into a future R1-series full frame camera!

 

[roby17269]

Yeah this one was stated by somebody else who complained about it freezing that often. Might have been a bit misleading as introduction right under your quote.

no worries it happens

Yeah, I know that mild panic when freezing happens the first time
Of course even seconds can be too long when shooting action, but I would say it’s that rare, that it is not risky.

As mentioned I am a hobbyist so for me it's just the aggravation if I miss a moment. With wildlife and my daughter it's an issue... with models shooting fashion I simply tell them to pose the same again

Almost the same here.. but I don’t really consider the settings for cards, AF and Wi-Fi customizing, as these are just settings to be set. Customizing for me begins when rearranging functions/buttons and stuff like that, but that’s just my interpretation of customizing.

I work in IT. Technically all of those scenarios are "configurations" because even when changing buttons (e.g.) you are still operating within the boundaries of what the camera's firmware allows you to do. If those changes cause issues, it's the manufacturer's fault, not the user's, since the user hasn't "hacked" the camera, they have just used a legitimate function of the software. "Customization" is when you change the code to alter the behavior of the camera in a way that is beyond what the standard firmware allows.

Sorry for being pedantic

 

[scyrene]

Both things can be true. The decision was almost certainly deliberate and the R1 will likely sell and perform as expected. Simultaneously, a theoretical R1 with 45MP could’ve sold better, be disliked by the sports shooters but also loved by wildlife people.

I’ve worked on products where the company deliberately targeted a certain market and also deliberately ignored a bigger, but different market. The products were still deemed successful, but could’ve been even more successful.
You can have all the market research in the world, but if the boss says “we aren’t going to sell to that market”, you aren’t going be able to design for that market

A nuanced reply. Everything is a tradeoff. They could release two R1 models at different resolutions; but the extra cost might not be worth it. If the R1 is 24MP we might judge how successful they feel it was by how much (if at all) the R1 mark II increases the megapixel count. In any case there is the R5 (and its successor) - so the market they may be ignoring is "high MP and gripped/extra rugged".

 

[neuroanatomist]

… so the market they may be ignoring is "high MP and gripped/extra rugged".

They’ve seemingly been doing that for quite some time now. Long enough to have made a change if warranted. Though markets do change.

 

[John Wilde]

Nikon is dying a slow death. They mostly use Sony sensors and after several years are only now catching up with Sony and Canon. What could they offer Canon ?

Nikon doesn't offer anything that Canon needs, but they aren't "dying a slow death". Their market share is small, but stable, and their Imaging division is profitable.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Nikon doesn't offer anything that Canon needs, but they aren't "dying a slow death". Their market share is small, but stable, and their Imaging division is profitable.

Stable…after dropping to ~1/3 of what it once was.

 

[LocationImaging]

One does have to look at the dismantling of the CPS program in many countries. Which I have always thought was the wrong direction to take CPS, but I guess part of it has been the push on CarePAK , and it's a forward-facing high margin revenue stream.

We have reached out to Canon about some things, I'm sure that'll go well.

I shoot major sporting events every week as the owner of a very small photo house. I am in distress over this dismantling of CPS and the lack of support of the working professionals who support Canon. For me, it started with the removal of Think Tank welcome gifts for CPS renewal. Then, we no longer received membership cards. Then, we lost personal CPS support at major events through the year. Then, we lost the help and encouragement of a large number (a majority?) of CPS USA representatives who were let go from the company, presumably to save money. Then, we lost the CPS Repair Facility in Jamesburg, NJ, forcing us to take a HUGE quality hit by utilizing the regular facility in Newport News, VA. Then, we lost access to a dedicated concierge phone line to arrange repairs and technical requests in lieu of online requests.

Should I go on? I literally think the only thing we get from Canon CPS now is shipping for repairs and a discount on those repairs. Are influencers the reason why people buy cameras? I thought we played a part in the sales process. That famous photo of a photo pit of a major sporting event with 18 big white lenses and 2 black ones really made a statement. But along came Sony to buy out a few major photo houses, and, not surprisingly, the independent folks followed suit and Sony is gaining a foothold in the professional marketplace.

You can NOT cost cut your was to business success.

I love Canon products. I have fully invested my company with Canon as a partner. And I will continue to do so...

I just hope we have a brighter future instead of the direction that I fear we are heading. As working professionals, we would be happy to work with Canon to help better both our companies.

Time will tell,

JFM

 

[roby17269]

Not true. Editorial photographers want the bigger file size to give them the opportunity to crop into their images more.

I am a fashion editorial photographer (hobbyist but at a decent level) and that is absolutely true.

When you are shooting unpredictable events such as news and sports you cannot always fill the frame with your subject due to being stuck in a fixed spot and not able to move, the unpredictability of your subject or the limitations of using a fixed prime lens such as a 400mm lens and unable to zoom in any more. All staff Associated Press photographers recently switched from using Canon to now all shooting with Sony, and AFP are using Nikon. With the photographers using the equivalent pro versions of the Sony and Nikon cameras having twice the file size to work with, they will be able to crop into and distribute images that photographers using the R1 just won't be able to do, putting the R1 user at a pretty big disadvantage in a very competitive environment. Especially at the upcoming Olympics!

To me, regardless of the subject matter, high mps give you a degree of versatility, all else being equal.

The cons are obvious: lower speed and longer computer time when processing. But modern high-mp cameras offer pretty decent speeds that should satisfy all but the most demanding use cases and modern computers chew thru big files with panache. There may be other (but no, more noise is not one of them).

The pros are obvious as well: more details and more cropping versatility. Yes I'd love to have all the lenses that Canon sells and be able to go from 8 to 1200mm at a whim. But in reality a) I cannot afford the big whites and b) even if you have the full collection, you do not bring them all with you all the time... and c) sometimes changing lenses is not an option. So, sometimes you have the right lens on camera and sometimes you don't. When I don't I'd rather have more mps to crop in than not.

 

[davidhfe]

I am a fashion editorial photographer (hobbyist but at a decent level) and that is absolutely true.

Sorry if I'm dense here but what fraction of editorial fashion photographers would not have these needs satisfied by an R5? I'm sure the number is not zero, but what's your honest estimation of the market size vs, say, photojournalists and sports shooters?

Not all "editorial" work needs an R3/1? The R1 is—near as I can tell—about ergonomics and power with big whites, class leading durability, class leading AF.

 

[roby17269]

Sorry if I'm dense here but what fraction of editorial fashion photographers would not have these needs satisfied by an R5? I'm sure the number is not zero, but what's your honest estimation of the market size vs, say, photojournalists and sports shooters?

Not all "editorial" work needs an R3/1? The R1 is—near as I can tell—about ergonomics and power with big whites, class leading durability, class leading AF.

Editorial work could be done successfully with much lower-end cameras. Lenses and lightning are much more important.
Resolution matters to show detail (materials, accessories, make up etc.)

We're talking about wants and desires. Who needs an R1? No one does. Sport wildlife photojournalists photographers have done their jobs fine with existing and past cameras. I have no idea of market size and it does not really matter to me. I am sure that there are more sport / pjs than there are fashion editorial shooters.

I want a high-resolution camera with a 1-class style body. The reason I want that is that I have had a 1D X for a few years and loved it apart from the resolution. Canon is not making such camera so I won't buy one. If they were to make one I would buy it. Simple as that.

To be clear, I am not saying that Canon has made a mistake in the way they have set the R1 specs in absolute terms - I am saying that those choices do not work for me and I prefer a different set of compromises

 

[John Wilde]

Stable…after dropping to ~1/3 of what it once was.

[Nikon] True. But they have at least figured out how to still have a profitable Imaging division.

 

[becceric]

Yeah, it’s almost as if Canon didn’t talk to professional sports photographers when designing the R1. Except, no doubt they did. They just didn’t talk to you. Obviously, Sony made the same egregious error when designing the a9III.

As you say, cropping is the most important thing. It’s not as if the ability to capture the exact peak of action with a higher frame rate provides any meaningful advantage.

If only Canon understood what photographers need as well as you do. Alas.

As a sidenote, it seems you’re new here. Over the past 14 years, I’ve seen a parade of “experts“ such as yourself telling us about all of Canon’s many mistakes and how they will have negative consequences. Somehow, Canon has weathered the storm of mistakes and managed to consistently lead the market and maintain a dominant market share. I suspect that’s because they do a very good job of determining the needs of buyers and fulfilling them.

"I suspect that’s because they do a very good job of determining the needs of buyers and fulfilling them."

Yep. That's been my opinion for 37 years, back when I was selling cameras. The good old days when you could walk into a local store in scrawny city that carried varied hardline merchandise and have a camera department with over 27 SLR models on display and in stock.

 

[Quack]

Not true. Editorial photographers want the bigger file size to give them the opportunity to crop into their images more. When you are shooting unpredictable events such as news and sports you cannot always fill the frame with your subject due to being stuck in a fixed spot and not able to move, the unpredictability of your subject or the limitations of using a fixed prime lens such as a 400mm lens and unable to zoom in any more. All staff Associated Press photographers recently switched from using Canon to now all shooting with Sony, and AFP are using Nikon. With the photographers using the equivalent pro versions of the Sony and Nikon cameras having twice the file size to work with, they will be able to crop into and distribute images that photographers using the R1 just won't be able to do, putting the R1 user at a pretty big disadvantage in a very competitive environment. Especially at the upcoming Olympics!

Thanks for the bullshit answer.