Official announcement of the Canon EOS R1 is now expected in July

[Ozarker]

Yes, and Harry does not need a touchscreen because he operates the controls of the R100 by mind-control!

And he's so exceptional he even does the mind control without a thought. Incredible.

 

[Ozarker]

Well spoken. At least, if petulant was the tone you were trying to achieve.

“If you don’t give me what I want I hope you fall and you get a crack in your butt.”

Meanwhile, it’s good to know that ALL the other integrated-grip MILCs are at least 45 MP. ALL one of them.

Neuro is the Rip Wheeler of CR.

 

[Ozarker]

The R1 crowd prefers speed over mpx. Canon seems to understand that. 1 series is for the photographer that cannot afford to miss a shot because of either camera malfunction in the field (ruggedness) or missed photo because of focus or fps. And this crowd is generally the action professional that buys long telephotos negating the need for cropping too much. So Canon will not trade speed. It will increase resolution somewhat when the processors become faster, but will still give preference to speed over mpx.

On a more practical level, I think R1 is geared more towards long lens users. $$$$$ R5 is geared more towards people who don't have those.

 

[Ozarker]

I've seen cellphone shots win competitions over "pro-level" full-frame cameras, so there is always overlap.

That's the problem. Thinking the camera wins. Photos win photo competitions. Lighting, style, composition, subject, etc. All of which have nothing to do with the camera. So it's no surprise the superior photo/photographer wins no matter the camera.

 

[John Wilde]

There does not seem to be any benefit at all for landscape photos of the rumored R5 II specs over the R5.

The main target audience for the R5 II is probably people who don't already have a R5.

 

[John Wilde]

R5 II = Mucho grandes megapixels R1 = poquito crippled megapixels

R1 = extreme durability, and whatever Canon's version of state-of-the-art autofocus is.

 

[David - Sydney]

Surely not, but all what we are asking for is a high-speed 45MP+ camera in a R3 style body

Are you suggesting that Canon emulate Nikon in having an equivalent Z9/Z8 body style?
I'm sure that the R5ii will be faster (however you measure it). Canon should know their markets best but I don't think that there would be a reason not to have 2 different bodies IF there was a profitable market there.

 

[David - Sydney]

On a more practical level, I think R1 is geared more towards long lens users. $$$$$ R5 is geared more towards people who don't have those.

Given the lower price points of the RF600/800 f11, RF200-800, RF100-400 and even the RF100-500, the choice of long lenses for users on a budget is better than ever!
My budget won't stretch to big whites but I love using my RF100-500 on my R5

 

[HarryFilm]

And he's so exceptional he even does the mind control without a thought. Incredible.

I'm sooooooooo exceptional that I can profess on a near continuous basis that CANON IS DOOOOOOOOOOOOMED I tell you ---- DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED!!!! So doomed that my Facial Bovine Scatology Emissions Device is able to express the specific nature of Canon's Dooooooom-edness with gross (i.e. Gross means large and not merely grotesque!) pontifications on super-duper-advanced technology that may or may not exist in my current 2024 human reality distortion field!

Meh!

V

 

[HarryFilm]

P.S. The 24 Megapixels of the Canon R1 means CANON IS UTTERLY DOOOOOOOOOOOOMED !!!!!!!!!!!

V

 

[HarryFilm]

P.S.2. AND .... the Whole Point About ANY old or new imaging hardware is that YOU SHOULD be taking photos -- Lots of Them!

The below image is from a NOKIA smartphone! It takes photos .... pretty decent ones too!

Behold! It's half-decent and it shows the eventual WHY DO WE DO THIS? as the biggest reason we are here on this website of CanonRumors!

V

 

[Ozarker]

R1 = extreme durability, and whatever Canon's version of state-of-the-art autofocus is.

Which most won't notice a big difference in except for the overall toughness. People who want to shoot wildlife, sports, or whatever and can't afford hugely expensive tele lenses will choose the R5 for it's ability to have huge crops. Deep pocketed grandparents aren't chasing down the sidelines and lugging those.

 

[David - Sydney]

If a patent is filed in a forest and no one is around to buy it, does it even count as innovation?

I'm sure that the cost for design is counted in someone's innovation budget and helping meet their KPIs... even if the punters don't think that it is innovation
I do wonder how much the patents actually protect Canon in their future products or whether they license the IP in the patent to others.
The BR goo on the EF35/1.4ii was meant to be a new frontier but hasn't been on any other lens to my knowledge.
Maybe Canon publishing them to mess with our heads!

 

[neuroanatomist]

The BR goo on the EF35/1.4ii was meant to be a new frontier but hasn't been on any other lens to my knowledge.

The RF 85/1.2L and it's DS cousin have a BR element.

 

[sanj]

That's the problem. Thinking the camera wins. Photos win photo competitions. Lighting, style, composition, subject, etc. All of which have nothing to do with the camera. So it's no surprise the superior photo/photographer wins no matter the camera.

Love this.

 

[koenkooi]

Luckily, Canon is not that stupid. Canon, I would be almost certain, is basing their decision on market research and by polling existing Sports and news photographers. While totally anecdotal, I just watched a Nikon ambassador(?) on a podcast discussing the 24 MP Z6 III. He said in conversation with sports photographers, many said they really would like a 16 MP camera. They really do not need or want more than that!

There’s still the possibility that Canon would sell more 50MP R1 units than 24MP R1 units, due to the sports&news market being fairly small and the dentists-with-law-degree pool a lot bigger.

Canon seems to strongly desire having their camera visible at sport events, they may even trade a bit of profit for exposure. Canon think it’s worth it, but it’s all theoretical till they have both a high MP and 24MP body and share the sales breakdown

 

[EOS 4 Life]

The main target audience for the R5 II is probably people who don't already have a R5.

Such people could save a lot of money by buying an R5.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

We are already talking about buying $4k R5IIs, so spending $6k and getting a 800/6.3 is not out of the question if you are a serious birder.

If it is just about the money then you can get an EF 800 f/5.6 for under $6K USD.
That would still be a lot bigger and heavier so the 800 PF still has a lot of advantages.

 

[sanj]

There’s still the possibility that Canon would sell more 50MP R1 units than 24MP R1 units, due to the sports&news market being fairly small and the dentists-with-law-degree pool a lot bigger.

Canon seems to strongly desire having their camera visible at sport events, they may even trade a bit of profit for exposure. Canon think it’s worth it, but it’s all theoretical till they have both a high MP and 24MP body and share the sales breakdown

But, can Canon make a 50MP R1 and still maintain the speed?

 

[koenkooi]

But, can Canon make a 50MP R1 and still maintain the speed?

I think ‘speed’ is a relative concept, for a 50MP camera, no-asterisk 30fps would already be fast, IMO. But I’m not an action shooter, nor a professional.

And since using the R7, I’ve really started appreciating cameras where the AF can keep up with the fps, which the R7 cannot. If the AF can keep up, I’d want all the fps I can get, with full bit depth and low rolling shutter.