Opinion: The R5 Mark II sounds cool – but where’s my Canon R5s?

[DSB]

I disagree with this.

It's VERY realistic to expect them to do this - since they announced 8 years ago a 120MP DSLR in development that never has come yet.

if they didn't do that development announcement and show it off for 1 to 2 years in trade shows, I'd agree with you.

Also - Canon fills niches if they think it's profitable it doesn't have to be a majority of users.

This is exactly what I tried to explain to him in some other threads. If Canon never made any mention of a 100+ megapixel sensor, I'd keep my mouth shut.

He's acting as if expecting Canon to at least keep up with competition when it comes to sensor resolution is unreasonable.

It's been five years since Sony came out with 61 mpix. A few months ago they officially announced they have a 250 mpix cmos sensor, and while it's intended for industrial use, it's pretty clear where things are heading. 5 years later, Canon is still stuck at 45 mpix.

I want Canon to do good, to be competitive and for myself and everybody else to keep using their cameras. But I won't be sticking my head in the sand, acting like they don't have catching up to do.

 

[neuroanatomist]

This is exactly what I tried to explain to him in some other threads. If Canon never made any mention of a 100+ megapixel sensor, I'd keep my mouth shut.

They also made a 250 MP sensor, do you also expect that in an upcoming MILC? Again, that development announcement was 9 years ago (2015, I was incorrectly using Richard’s number of years), and was for a DSLR. If you look at the actual PR from Canon, there’s a footnote that the camera is not available for sale and there’s no assurance that it will ever be available for sale…a footnote conspicuously absent from development announcements that actually became products.

You guys are reading way too much into this. Canon showed off a prototype. So what? Where’s the 600/4 DO they showed off as a prototype in 2015 alongside the 120 MP sensor? Or the Wonder Camera they promoted in 2010? Vaporware.

He's acting as if expecting Canon to at least keep up with competition when it comes to sensor resolution is unreasonable.

I expect Canon to make the cameras they believe will best support their business. I also expect they know best what cameras will do so.

Canon knows the market better than we do. Your wish for them to ‘keep up with the competition’ is just an implied wish for Canon to fulfill your personal want. I have wants, too…but I don’t expect Canon to fulfill them because of that.

Meanwhile, I can buy a Canon FF MILC and a trio of RF zoom lenses covering 15-400mm for somewhere around $2500. I don’t see you complaining that Sony and Nikon are failing to ‘keep up with the competition’ by offering a relatively affordable setup like that. Why? Because it’s not something you personally wish for.

Personally, I try to view Canon’s decisions through a lens of business acumen. If you want to view their decisions through the lens of your personal desires, that’s your call. But its going to be a very distorted view.

That's not to say that Canon won't make a high MP camera. They have done so in the past, and will probably do so again. To the point of the title of this thread, where is the R5s? It will be here when Canon wants it to be, on their schedule. Not yours. It may be too late for you, Canon doesn't care. Just like they didn't care when people claimed they were 'late to mirrorless' but the EOS M line became the best-selling MILC badge and Canon now sells more MILCs than anyone else.

It's been five years since Sony came out with 61 mpix. A few months ago they officially announced they have a 250 mpix cmos sensor, and while it's intended for industrial use, it's pretty clear where things are heading. 5 years later, Canon is still stuck at 45 mpix.

As I said, Canon announced a 250 MP CMOS sensor in 2015. So you’re saying Sony is 9 years behind the competition. Ok.

I want Canon to do good, to be competitive and for myself and everybody else to keep using their cameras. But I won't be sticking my head in the sand, acting like they don't have catching up to do.

Canon doesn’t care about ‘being competitive’ in your personal headspace, they care about being competitive in the global camera market. Clearly they are, if you take your head out of the sand long enough to look at the data.

The bottom line is that you’re implying Canon is not competitive because they’re not making the camera you want. The objective reality is that they dominate the camera market, and they got there and stayed there by designing and selling cameras the majority of customers want to buy. If their decisions don't align with your priorities, that's a you problem.

 

[Baywoof]

I've been considering moving to Fujifilm medium format, but alas I have too much already invested in Canon glass and as a hobbyist the switch is economically prohibitive. I have an R5 now and really like it but I would really like to see a bump in MP, at least to the 60 mp to 80 mp range. I crop frequently and the extra resolution will really help. Years ago I upgraded my camera system from a 5D Mark II to a 5DS and WOW. In some respect I still wish I had it as it's images were every bit as good and some better than the R5. I'm not too optimistic though. Camera makers are now putting emphasis on hybrid and videocentric cameras. I feel that stills photographers are being ignored.

 

[Canon Rumors Guy]

Such a camera has appeared on a 2025 roadmap.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Such a camera has appeared on a 2025 roadmap.

Surely Canon cannot survive until then without a high MP camera.

 

[koenkooi]

Such a camera has appeared on a 2025 roadmap.

I hope it’s on a Canon roadmap

 

[DSB]

I expect Canon to make the cameras they believe will best support their business. I also expect they know best what cameras will do so.

Canon knows the market better than we do. Your wish for them to ‘keep up with the competition’ is just an implied wish for Canon to fulfill your personal want. I have wants, too…but I don’t expect Canon to fulfill them because of that.

I still don't understand why do you mind if I express my dissatisfaction with the upcoming Canon offerings? I'm certainly not the only one making noise about sensor resolution being behind the competition. Basically, you want everyone to shut up and just gobble up whatever Canon throws out, without making any complaints "bEcAu$e CaNoN k0Ws Be$t!!!".

You have wants too... Why don't you voice them? I'm pretty sure there are people from Canon reading these forums, and I actually do have insider insight into how Canon works, since I was an ambassador, had NDA's signed and received unreleased gear for testing and feedback etc. No one can read your mind buddy, you have to say it out loud.

Personally, I try to view Canon’s decisions through a lens of business acumen. If you want to view their decisions through the lens of your personal desires, that’s your call. But its going to be a very distorted view.

That's not to say that Canon won't make a high MP camera. They have done so in the past, and will probably do so again. To the point of the title of this thread, where is the R5s? It will be here when Canon wants it to be, on their schedule. Not yours. It may be too late for you, Canon doesn't care. Just like they didn't care when people claimed they were 'late to mirrorless' but the EOS M line became the best-selling MILC badge and Canon now sells more MILCs than anyone else.

The bottom line is that you’re implying Canon is not competitive because they’re not making the camera you want. The objective reality is that they dominate the camera market, and they got there and stayed there by designing and selling cameras the majority of customers want to buy. If their decisions don't align with your priorities, that's a you problem.

Again with the narrative that a corporation can't do wrong... Yet we have the famous Kodak, a beautiful example of a photography market leader going bankrupt because they couldn't recognize where the market was heading. Now, I'm not making parallels between Canon and Kodak, and I don't expect Canon to fail or go bankrupt, but I'm calling the Kodak card as a simple counterpoint to your attitude that companies know best.

They don't, certainly not always.

And people from inside do read forums and review sites and rumor sites and you can actually influence them with strong arguments. I know this because I got contacted several times by people from inside various global corporations just based on my online posts and on few occasions I was actually invited and was involved with development process of a few electronic devices that you and everybody else has heard of (not Canon).

So, please understand that I will keep voicing my dissatisfaction and in the future just restrain yourself from interacting with me.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Basically, you want everyone to shut up and just gobble up whatever Canon throws out, without making any complaints "bEcAu$e CaNoN k0Ws Be$t!!!".

Complain all you want. Yes…Canon knows best, for Canon. Your only real choice is buy or don’t buy. If enough people don’t buy, Canon will respond.

You have wants too... Why don't you voice them?

I have…directly to Canon.

Again with the narrative that a corporation can't do wrong... Yet we have the famous Kodak,

Don’t forget Nokia! Yes, companies make mistakes. Not releasing the camera you personally want isn’t one of them.

So, please understand that I will keep voicing my dissatisfaction and in the future just restrain yourself from interacting with me.

No. You do not get to decide what I post. Voice your dissatisfaction all you want, and if my responses bother you, then you just restrain yourself from replying.

 

[DSB]

Nah, I've had it with you, a block is in order. Byeee!

 

[TwoWheeler]

Have you tried the sensor shift? It's pretty much useless. Not only it's JPG only, even the slightest amount of motion will ruin the image - and by motion I mean any motion, including air turbulence motion, clouds moving, tiniest bit of wind on the grass, water flowing etc. So even if you're shooting a completely static subject, like a mountain or a house, it will in most cases cause more problems than you can anticipate, with all the strange artifacts and messed up jagged edges.

I tried it multiple times and concluded it to be 100% unusable both for architecture as well as landscape. You can get better results just by shooting RAW and upscaling with AI.

Yeah, just for excrement and hilarity, I wanted to see what motion blur looked like with pixel shift, so I shot a waterfall. I wound up with a bizarre herringbone pattern in the water that was obvious even when not zoomed in.

 

[TwoWheeler]

As for AI upscalers, I've used photoshop and Topaz. Photoshop is a beta feature, but Topaz is actually great if you're going to upscale an 8 mpix to 16 mpix, or even 24 to 48 mpix. But 45 to 90 mpix... that's a different story.

Topaz did an amazing job on some old pics from my 12 MP Sony A200. I was playing with an old Canon PowerShot point and wait a couple of months ago and when Topaz saw the 4MP files, it just threw up it’s little electronic hands and said “Nope. Can’t help you”.

 

[masterpix]

I think people forget there is a whole market of professionals who regulary use tripods and actually don't need high shutter speed. What they do need is high resolution. I couldn't care less if the camera shoots 8 fps or 16 fps or 32 fps, or the depth of the buffer. I'm not going to shoot 300 raw bursts.


As for AI upscalers, I've used photoshop and Topaz. Photoshop is a beta feature, but Topaz is actually great if you're going to upscale an 8 mpix to 16 mpix, or even 24 to 48 mpix. But 45 to 90 mpix... that's a different story. And understandably so, because these algorythms have been trained on mostly mid-resolution photos, because those are widely available.


It also really depends on the motif. It did great to upscale an eagle portrait, but failed miserably when I gave it a go with landscape. AI upscalers are not there yet.

Thanks for your reply.

 

[Quack]

When the R5 was introduced (and it is a fine camera), for my purposes it was at all a compelling upgrade from the 5DsR I have used since that camera was introduced. I continued to use the 5DsR with my excellent EF lenses.

Like you, I sat back and waited, figuring that eventually Canon would complete in the high—MP full frame space by increasing sensor resolution to about 80MP. As you point out, they obviously already have APS-C cameras with equivalent pixel density. My plan was to move to the R system when Cann introduced such a high-MP mirrorless camera.

And now we see what seems like essentially a moderately updated R5 in the rumored R5II, but no high MP body. Some will say that 45MP is not that different from 50MP, and that’s true. But being true — at least for this photographer who uses such cameras mostly for landscape photography — that’s the problem. It provides no major, significant benefits for the typical high-MP photographer. Yes, it is better than the 5DsR in some ways, but not in compelling enough fashion to be worth the update.

So, I continue now to look at the Sony option. Plenty of fine photographers use that system to do work similar to mine. I also continue to consider the Fujifilm GFX 100s II, though the need to use adapted lenses to cover some things that I rely on with Canon EF lenses is still a concern.

What I can say with certainty is that I have no plans to buy the rumored R5ii if it has the specs as described. This could well be the end of my 20+ year run with Canon.

I would suggest renting one of the higher MP options. You may find that higher MPs does not make as much difference as you think. Or, it might be exactly what you want.

 

[Quack]

Ditto for me but as I have been told numerous times on this forum, apparently Canon doesn’t care about folks like us as they are putting all their effort into sports photographers, portrait and wedding photographers and vloggers.

Disappointing and frustrating given the wait since the 5DsR. I too primarily shoot landscape (from 11 to 600mm) and astrophotography. I assume both would benefit from additional MPs and have too looked more seriously at Sony, Nikon and Fuji options. ..

Rent some of the above. You may find that your assumed benefits of more MPs is correct, or not exactly what you think.

I think Canon believes that 45 MP is enough for anyone wanting high resolution. I think they have probably tested - and concluded - that adding more MPs is not as beneficial as people believe and is a case of diminishing returns.

 

[DSB]

Rent some of the above. You may find that your assumed benefits of more MPs is correct, or not exactly what you think.

I think Canon believes that 45 MP is enough for anyone wanting high resolution. I think they have probably tested - and concluded - that adding more MPs is not as beneficial as people believe and is a case of diminishing returns.

...which is why on the market we have 60, 100 and 150 mpix sensors - because they're not better than 45 megapixels. Yeah right. Seriously...

 

[neuroanatomist]

...which is why on the market we have 60, 100 and 150 mpix sensors - because they're not better than 45 megapixels. Yeah right. Seriously...

Sure, and that 150 MP sensor comes in a box that has great autofocus and high speed shooting capabilities, right? Because megapickles are everything. Yeah right. Seriously..