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

[Billybob]

If they are selling well and making money for Nikon then they could presumably sell well and make money for Canon.
We have no way of knowing for sure, but I do not think we would have the RF 200-800 if the Sony 200-600 did not sell so well.
The Nikon 800 f/6.3 PF is not nearly selling as well as the RF 200-800 or RF 800 f/11 DO but it is surely out selling the RF 800 f/5.6.
Maybe there is room in Canon's lineup for an RF 800 f/6.3 DO.
I definitely see room for an RF 600 f/6.3 DO.

Agree. The 200-800mm is clearly a "me too" product that Canon took a long time to introduce. In hindsight the delay was likely due to the transition to mirrorless and also a desire to avoid simply copying the Sony offering (Nikon's entry in the category was rather weak in that it simply expanded the wide end by an insignificant 20mm!).

But the high-IQ, lightweight primes is an area that Canon should compete in (notice I don't consider the 800mm f/11 "high IQ"). I suspect that Nikon aggressively priced 800mm pf is probably the highest selling exotic 800mm ever (again, I'm not including the fixed-aperture Canon 800mm f/11 as part of this market segment). And Nikon's lightweight 400mm, 500mm pf (DSLR lens), and 600mm pf lenses are particularly attractive to older photographers who are weight sensitive but also are likely to have bigger budgets.

Does Canon need to offer competitive products to maintain its lead? Definitely not. But it creates a quandary for Canon photographers who want such products.

 

[Billybob]

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

I'd revise your quote as:

"If a patent is filed in a forest and no product is released based on it, does it even count as innovation?

 

[Billybob]

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.

I found the R7 to be a true paradox. It was by far the best crop sensor camera I had ever used but almost completely unusable (by me) for my intended purpose. The AF difficulties you mentioned, the extreme rolling shutter, and the almost comically loud mirror slaps using the mechanical shutter made it unpleasant to use for wildlife/action photography. I think that I would have spent $500-$600 more on a Canon body that eliminated most of these flaws. Of course, that would make the camera too expensive for its intended market.

 

[koenkooi]

I found the R7 to be a true paradox. It was by far the best crop sensor camera I had ever used but almost completely unusable (by me) for my intended purpose. The AF difficulties you mentioned, the extreme rolling shutter, and the almost comically loud mirror slaps using the mechanical shutter made it unpleasant to use for wildlife/action photography. I think that I would have spent $500-$600 more on a Canon body that eliminated most of these flaws. Of course, that would make the camera too expensive for its intended market.

This week I’ve started each day with the R8+100-500L and R7+EF180L. That way I could get in-focus shots with the electronic shutter of birds during the bike ride to the pond and switched lenses once I settled in and stopped scaring the frogs.
The R8 that then had the 180L would get used for dragonflies and damselflies.

The R7 takes such great pictures when it works, I’m also getting better at picking situations where it will work. The R8 is a lot more forgiving and hence more fun to use But 24 vs 82 equivalent MP makes up for a lot!

I’ll happily sell the R7 once I get my R5II.

 

[scyrene]

The midrange teles from Nikon fit into the market occupied by forum posters.

If we want a very long tele for birding (e.g. ~800mm), most of us are not going to go out and buy a RF 800/5.6L at $17k, but on the other hand we can afford to spend more money and get a brighter lens than an RF 800/11 or even the RF 200-800/6.3-9.

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.

I would absolutely love to see more options. But still, we already have more than in the past. In EF days there was one 800mm lens.

 

[Quack]

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

Said so many times and yet so many people here just don't get it. One generation upgrades are almost always small and incremental. I'm sure Canon (or any other brand maker) loves it when a person buys the next generation of the same series camera, but that is clearly not the target market. It amazes me when people are so disappointed with those small upgrades. They whine and complain and say ridiculously stupid things about the camera maker being "so far behind the competition" or "using old tech," as if they want their existing camera to be "obsolete" after 3 or 4 years, and want to spend another $4000 dollars on a new camera that will, in all likelihood, give them exactly the same results as their old camera.

 

[Quack]

I found the R7 to be a true paradox. It was by far the best crop sensor camera I had ever used but almost completely unusable (by me) for my intended purpose. The AF difficulties you mentioned, the extreme rolling shutter, and the almost comically loud mirror slaps using the mechanical shutter made it unpleasant to use for wildlife/action photography. I think that I would have spent $500-$600 more on a Canon body that eliminated most of these flaws. Of course, that would make the camera too expensive for its intended market.

Are you limiting your FPS to 15? Using H drive mode rather than H+? Using Elec 1st curtain rather than Electronic unless you need the higher FPS?

In my experience, that eliminates the issues most folks mention, though to be honest, never really had any issues. If you have used those recommended settings, perhaps your camera is faulty? I have briefly owned both the R5 and the R6 II, and my AF results with the R7 were just as good and those other cameras were either returned or sold.

 

[koenkooi]

Are you limiting your FPS to 15? Using H drive mode rather than H+? Using Elec 1st curtain rather than Electronic unless you need the higher FPS?

In my experience, that eliminates the issues most folks mention, though to be honest, never really had any issues. If you have used those recommended settings, perhaps your camera is faulty? I have briefly owned both the R5 and the R6 II, and my AF results with the R7 were just as good and those other cameras were either returned or sold.

H and EFCS improve things a bit, but it still misfocuses slightly a few shots into a burst and goes off on its own too often.
The R8 does that as well, but far less often.

If I point a camera at a heron 40 meters away, the R8 will spot the eye and have that in focus, the R7 will take a few tries before it locks onto the eye and then will have the neck or beak in focus, not the eye.

I’m very deliberate, as in getting off the bicycle and hunching down a bit, the R7 will find subjects faster, but still focus and defocus slightly during a burst.

Putting it in people mode, it does a lot better with my kids, so I don’t think my copy is faulty

 

[John Wilde]

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

When Canon releases the R5 II they will probably discontinue the R5.

 

[kaihp]

I'd revise your quote as:

"If a patent is filed in a forest and no product is released based on it, does it even count as innovation?

When I went to business school, they defined innovation as 'inventions that are successful in the marketplace'.

So from that perspective, the answer to your question would be "No".

 

[EOS 4 Life]

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

Maybe if they increased the price.
If Canon wants to compete against the Z 9, then a 50 MP R3 or R2 would make more sense.
However, I am not sure Canon wants to compete against the Z 9.

 

[tron]

I found the R7 to be a true paradox. It was by far the best crop sensor camera I had ever used but almost completely unusable (by me) for my intended purpose. The AF difficulties you mentioned, the extreme rolling shutter, and the almost comically loud mirror slaps using the mechanical shutter made it unpleasant to use for wildlife/action photography. I think that I would have spent $500-$600 more on a Canon body that eliminated most of these flaws. Of course, that would make the camera too expensive for its intended market.

Still, it is very good for me for ... still birds . Pun intended but that is true. I am using it with RF100-500.

 

[Quack]

Maybe if they increased the price.
If Canon wants to compete against the Z 9, then a 50 MP R3 or R2 would make more sense.
However, I am not sure Canon wants to compete against the Z 9.

Canon is likely not competing with anyone with the R1. It is a camera for 1 series DSLR owners to migrate to mirrorless. Along with some 5D III and IV DSLR owners looking to upgrade and go to mirrorless. And perhaps some R3 and R5 owners. In my opinion, of course.

 

[davidhfe]

Canon is likely not competing with anyone with the R1. It is a camera for 1 series DSLR owners to migrate to mirrorless. Along with some 5D III and IV DSLR owners looking to upgrade and go to mirrorless. And perhaps some R3 and R5 owners. In my opinion, of course.

The AP might disagree with you there. If you’re the market leader in the segment there’s probably somebody always looking to dethrone you.

 

[P-visie]

Said so many times and yet so many people here just don't get it. One generation upgrades are almost always small and incremental. I'm sure Canon (or any other brand maker) loves it when a person buys the next generation of the same series camera, but that is clearly not the target market. It amazes me when people are so disappointed with those small upgrades. They whine and complain and say ridiculously stupid things about the camera maker being "so far behind the competition" or "using old tech," as if they want their existing camera to be "obsolete" after 3 or 4 years, and want to spend another $4000 dollars on a new camera that will, in all likelihood, give them exactly the same results as their old camera.

I agree with most of what you are saying, but I probably have a different definition of ‘small and incremental’. I’ve compared the Canon EOS 5D with the Mark II, Mark III, and Mark IV. My conclusion is that many ‘small changes’ made, for me, good reasons to upgrade.
Summary of changes:

Sensor Resolution:

• 5D: 12.8 megapixels
• Mark II: 21.1 megapixels
• Mark III: 22.3 megapixels
• Mark IV: 30.4 megapixels

Autofocus System:

• 5D: 9-point AF
• Mark II: 9-point AF (1 cross-type point)
• Mark III: 61-point AF (41 cross-type points), center point effective at f8
• Mark IV: 61-point AF (41 cross-type points), all effective at f8

Drive:

• 5D: 3 fps
• Mk II: 3.9 fps
• Mk III: 6 fps
• Mk IV: 7 fps

Video:

• 5D: No video
• Mark II: 1080p video
• Mark III: Improved 1080p video
• Mark IV: 4K video

Dynamic range (From DXO)

• 5D: 11.1 stops
• Mark II: 11.9 stops
• Mark III: 11.7 stops
• Mark IV: 13.6 stops

New features on the 5D Mk IV:

• GPS built in
• Wifi built in
• Lower noise
• Dual pixel RAW
• Touch screen

 

[roby17269]

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

For me ths same speed as the Sony A1 would be plenty...

 

[koenkooi]

For me ths same speed as the Sony A1 would be plenty...

With the same asterisks in the specs, or a proper 30fps?

 

[trexphotos]

The R1 and Canon ARE DOOMED cuz i\'m using a custom-designed camera that uses a vertically stacked RGB + Greyscale Luma photosite ultra-high-sensivity Super Medium Format 72 mm by 72 mm CMOS sensor with 65,536 by 65,536 pixels at 128-bits wide RGBA colour at 32-bits ber RGBA Channel downsampled to 16-bits per channel via Nyquist resampling)

My lenses are high refractive index optical grade all-acrylic that are native T1.5 across the board on the primes lenses with a few T0.95 Noctilux primes for super low-light applications.

These will all be introduced shortly for sale for a lot cheaper than an R1 !!!

Now Mass Market. I just bought one at Pest Buy. Body and Noct prime kit under $1k

 

[DhlcadR6]

For me ths same speed as the Sony A1 would be plenty...

Aka slower than R3....

 

[roby17269]

Aka slower than R3....

But 50mp v 24mp. I would take the 45-50 over 24 any time any speed