Are two cameras going to replace the Canon EOS R5? [CR]

[neuroanatomist]

How about a cheaper R5 with like 32MP for those who cant afford the R5II and RS or whatever its called. Make it a photo only camera for many of us who do not want video? Price it around $3099. I know. Keep dreaming…

It's called the EOS R6 II, 24 MP and it's priced at $2500. It does have video, because Canon isn't dumb and the reality is that including video doesn't raise the price, it lowers it because it increases the market appeal.

You can wake up now.

 

[entoman]

How about a cheaper R5 with like 32MP for those who cant afford the R5II and RS or whatever its called. Make it a photo only camera for many of us who do not want video? Price it around $3099. I know. Keep dreaming…

Why produce a 32MP model that would for most purposes be no better than the recently released 24MP R6ii? Won't happen.

It's cheaper and more logical to produce hybrid cameras than to have still-only and video-only models. Won't happen.

 

[bbasiaga]

Could be quite exciting....I still want to see what an R1 looks like. Also curious to see if we ever get an R3mkII, but that'll be a ways after the R1 I imagine. R1 might have Canon's first stacked sensor. Which I think means we won't see one in the R5II or R5S or whatever they call it.

By the end of the year we might know enough about what these look like, R1, R5II(s). And we might get another price drop on the R5 itself, which could be compelling as well.

-Brian

 

[neuroanatomist]

R1 might have Canon's first stacked sensor.

Second. The R3 has a stacked/BSI sensor.

 

[Hector1970]

The R5 is an excellent camera. Well worth picking up if the second hand price drops with a new model (s). The easiest thing for Canon to do is 60MP / 30 FPS. Both are a diminishing return to me. 20 FPS / 30 FPS is a lot of images either way. 46MP / 60MP hmmm useful but not essential.
What I’d like to see is an improved autofocus. It’s good but could be better, smarter. Without that improvement I’d find it hard to think of switching from the current R5. It’s a no excuse camera. If you are not getting good images with an R5 it’s either you lens collection or the photographer. It’s not the camera.

 

[SwissFrank]

OK, I'll bite.

Canon patented a radically new sensor type a few years ago that would be able to do 1) global shutter, 2) nearly double dynamic range, 3) electronic neutral density filter.

Maybe that sensor is either low resolution, or fiendishly expensive, so they give you a choice between the current sensor or the new one? (I don't follow other brands; is the R5's sensor no longer cutting edge or near to it? When it came out I recall it was near the top for DR and noise but that was several years ago.)

Alternately, maybe the focus-follows-your-eye sensor makes it bulkier or more expensive so again they're offering both models?

I love my R5 so much that I can't see a way to improve specs, really. I don't need more MP or less noise or more ISO or better colors or longer movie shooting times or faster burst speed etc. etc. etc. (I'd like more slo-mo and timelapse options built-in, for instance, but that might be as simple as a software upgrade.)

But I'd totally consider an upgrade to my R5 if the improvements were something like focus-point-follows-photographers-eye, or say some of the features I describe above whether or not they're thanks to a new sensor.

 

[unfocused]

If this happens I would expect to see the II version come in at around 60mp and the high resolution version north of 100 mp. Any less and there just isn’t enough separation between the two bodies.

The history of 5 series bodies has been one of progressively higher resolution. I don’t see Canon breaking with that tradition. Also Canon likes to produce showstoppers, so a 100-120 mp body makes sense.

On the other hand @entoman may be correct that we are more likely to see a cinema R5 II. After years of convergence the needs of both are starting to diverge as the desired features become more specialized, so releasing both a “standard” and a cinema version at the same time makes some sense.

 

[Hector1970]

Could be quite exciting....I still want to see what an R1 looks like. Also curious to see if we ever get an R3mkII, but that'll be a ways after the R1 I imagine. R1 might have Canon's first stacked sensor. Which I think means we won't see one in the R5II or R5S or whatever they call it.

By the end of the year we might know enough about what these look like, R1, R5II(s). And we might get another price drop on the R5 itself, which could be compelling as well.

-Brian

I think we will get an R3II first if the planned R1 is outspecced by Sony/Nikon. They need to leave enough space for a R1 or R3II sticker.

 

[SwissFrank]

If you are not getting good images with an R5 it’s either you lens collection or the photographer. It’s not the camera.

Yeah, really agree. I started shooting in 1995 and this is the first time I can say: it's ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CAMERA.

 

[entoman]

On the other hand @entoman may be correct that we are more likely to see a cinema R5 II. After years of convergence the needs of both are starting to diverge as the desired features become more specialized, so releasing both a “standard” and a cinema version at the same time makes some sense.

Definitely. I think almost all future cameras will be stills/video hybrids, but the wants/needs of each user group are quite different. Features such as pixel-shift and arguably IBIS are not wanted by the video guys. Features such as 8K, waveforms, false colour, timecodes and C log are only for folk who are heavily into video. Standard "hybrids" are a compromise and don't sufficiently fulfil the desires of either group.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Makes perfect sense to me:
- R5c
- R5s (s for stills) or R5r (r for resolution) and the
- R5 mkii

A R5 for every need.

In order to differentiate the cameras (MP wise) it could look like this:
R5 Mk 1 --> 45 MP
R5mk 2 --> 61 MP
R5s --> 77-90 MP

In Addition,
R5c --> 45 MP

Canon could use the same body for the R5 and the R5s (or r) version and differentiate in just a few things (other then the sensor) such as pixel shift mode with RAW output or something like it.

 

[Fischer]

If this happens I would expect to see the II version come in at around 60mp and the high resolution version north of 100 mp. Any less and there just isn’t enough separation between the two bodies.

The history of 5 series bodies has been one of progressively higher resolution. I don’t see Canon breaking with that tradition. Also Canon likes to produce showstoppers, so a 100-120 mp body makes sense.

On the other hand @entoman may be correct that we are more likely to see a cinema R5 II. After years of convergence the needs of both are starting to diverge as the desired features become more specialized, so releasing both a “standard” and a cinema version at the same time makes some sense.

5DII and 5DIII had very few extra pixels, so Canon could also do a 50 MPIX R5II and an 80 MPIX R5S.

 

[scyrene]

Makes perfect sense to me:
- R5c
- R5s (s for stills) or R5r (r for resolution) and the
- R5 mkii

A R5 for every need.

In order to differentiate the cameras (MP wise) it could look like this:
R5 Mk 1 --> 45 MP
R5mk 2 --> 61 MP
R5s --> 77-90 MP

In Addition,
R5c --> 45 MP

Canon could use the same body for the R5 and the R5s (or r) version and differentiate in just a few things (other then the sensor) such as pixel shift mode with RAW output or something like it.

Not much difference between 61 and 77MP, hardly enough to justify two models, unless there were lots of other distinguishing features.

 

[amorse]

Well that would be a treat!

 

[LookingThroughMyLens81]

Canon can bump the low-end to 32MP and cap the high-end at 50MP or whatever makes technical sense with the sensor/buffer designs and limitations. A high-megapixel camera - likely for studios - makes no business sense at this point and they can cede that niche market to the medium format makers, who do it so well. We're at the point where SD Express is finally ready and able to replace SDXC/SDHC in consumer cameras and complement CF Express in the Pro/Enthusiast cameras, so a resolution bump that isn't a high jump is certainly doable and desirable, especially since 4K monitors are becoming the norm and new 8K monitors for graphics design/visual arts are coming soon.

 

[TonyG]

I assume we'd be looking at 90MP and 20fps for the hi-res version, and 45MP and 40fps for the sports version (although that would *seriously* undermine sales of R3). But the R5 can *already* shoot 45MP at 20fps, and I'd already taken it as granted that after 3-4 years Canon would be *capable* of producing a successor with 60MP and 30fps, at a price not much higher than the upcoming Z8.

So I don't think 90MP at 20 fps is really possible, or the R5ii being able to shoot raw faster than 20 fps.
45 at 20 is pretty much the max a CF express type B card can do. 45 MBish at a transfer rate of 900 MB/s (more so a real world multi file write scenario) is 20 files per second.
60MP files ~60MB is maxed at 15 files per second
90MP files ~90MB is maxed at 10 files per second.

It makes sense why the A7Rv is capped at 10 fps on its CF Express type A cards with their slower write speeds.
IF Canon makes a R5s as a high resolution body, they would either have to use an internal or external SSD in order to shoot fast, and again that processing would have to be insanely fast to process the data on that sensor. I don't think realistically its something that could even be used for sports or anything fast motion and fast capture as it might have banding or other issues with that large of a pixel density.

Realistically if you are product or landscape or some sort of studio photographer with a need for a R5s to replace a 5Ds, I don't think anything more than 5-10 fps is really required.
Thats my 2 cents. Maybe I am wrong, who knows.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Not much difference between 61 and 77MP, hardly enough to justify two models, unless there were lots of other distinguishing features.

5d mk iv had 30 mp, the 5dr had 50 mp, also not that much of a difference...

Ok, then maybe 90MP? Or 100 MP? I thought they'd save the 100 MP barrier for a mkii version of the specialized camera.
Maybe the R5mkii will have 45-50mp...

 

[splatrabbit]

I would like to see a 60+MP R1 in the R3's form factore and leave the R5mk2 at 45-ish. Maybe BSI or Stacked sensor. That would make more sense to me.

 

[scyrene]

5d mk iv had 30 mp, the 5dr had 50 mp, also not that much of a difference...

Ok, then maybe 90MP? Or 100 MP? I thought they'd save the 100 MP barrier for a mkii version of the specialized camera.
Maybe the R5mkii will have 45-50mp...

The 5D4 came out after the 5DS(r); the latter bodies had more than twice the resolution of the then-current 5D3.

45 and 70-80 I could believe, or 60 and 90+ (surely the hi-res body's pixel density must match or exceed the R7 though); overall however, I feel like the lack of a replacement for the 5DS(r) in over a decade suggests it's not a high priority for them, and this rumour sounds like wishful thinking. No doubt higher resolution bodies will come though.

 

[entoman]

So I don't think 90MP at 20 fps is really possible, or the R5ii being able to shoot raw faster than 20 fps.
45 at 20 is pretty much the max a CF express type B card can do. 45 MBish at a transfer rate of 900 MB/s (more so a real world multi file write scenario) is 20 files per second.
60MP files ~60MB is maxed at 15 files per second
90MP files ~90MB is maxed at 10 files per second.

It makes sense why the A7Rv is capped at 10 fps on its CF Express type A cards with their slower write speeds.
IF Canon makes a R5s as a high resolution body, they would either have to use an internal or external SSD in order to shoot fast, and again that processing would have to be insanely fast to process the data on that sensor. I don't think realistically its something that could even be used for sports or anything fast motion and fast capture as it might have banding or other issues with that large of a pixel density.

Realistically if you are product or landscape or some sort of studio photographer with a need for a R5s to replace a 5Ds, I don't think anything more than 5-10 fps is really required.
Thats my 2 cents. Maybe I am wrong, who knows.

We're all guessing at the moment. This rumour is mainly just a piece of click-bait to keep us occupied until some real news about something else comes along. As usual it will turn into a conversation revolving around wish-lists, but of course Canon will be thinking purely in terms of what is feasible at various price levels, and what they think will produce maximum profit.

I agree that landscape and product photography doesn't really require anything more than 5-10fps. In fact most of it will be done as single shots unless HDR is needed.

Canon will be looking for mass sales, so compromises will be made, and that makes it less likely that specialised cameras will be produced - the ultra high-res landscape and product market is IMO better served by "MF" in the form of Fujifilm's GFX100, and Canon won't be entering that arena.