Canon EOS R1 & impressions by professional sports photographer Jeff Cable

[Canon Rumors]

Interesting discussion. The R1 appears to be squarely aimed at the professional press/sports photographers directly delivering jpeg's to customers. The most expensive camera's in the major companies' line-up are often directly compared to each other. But I'd argue they are positioned quite differently in the market by now.

It definitely is, a lot of wildlife photographers will be rolling with R1's as well, especially those that go into challenging environments.

 

[koenkooi]

Interesting discussion. The R1 appears to be squarely aimed at the professional press/sports photographers directly delivering jpeg's to customers. The most expensive camera's in the major companies' line-up are often directly compared to each other. But I'd argue they are positioned quite differently in the market by now.

Someone remarked that Canon heavily targets the FF R bodies to people who take pictures of other people. You can see glimpses of engineering features that were worked on for that, like the 'face relight' option when shooting DP-RAW and the "we know where the driver is in bikes/cars/boats, even when wearing a helmet" AF support.

That is great for my family snapshots, but less great for insects. Putting an AF point on the head of a butterfly and have the camera track it will have it wandering everywhere (wings, flower, background 2 meters away), but not track the head. Funnily enough, the OG EOS M does a better job at that than the R7. Switch the mode to 'people' and it locks on to the eyes of my kids 50 meters away.
I wish Canon would improve "track this distinctive pattern, it's not a subject you know about", or expand the subject detection support with insects

The butterfly pictures this morning did come out great, putting the small AF point manually on the eye or moustache worked as expected. I just wish I could really on AF tracking a lot more. In video mode the tracking is slightly better, but I can't figure out how to enable focus override when it inevitably wanders off to the background. With people, zero problems.

 

[Canon Rumors]

How/why do you agree? What do you know? Please tell. Honest question.

Canon Rumors gets preorder sales affiliate revenue, and the R1 has done well for us so far. We see what sells via B&H, Adorama, MPEX, Cnaon USA... that sort of thing. It's about the same ratio compared to a 5 series that we have seen in the past.

 

[koenkooi]

Canon Rumors gets preorder sales affiliate revenue, and the R1 has done well for us so far. We see what sells via B&H, Adorama, MPEX, Cnaon USA... that sort of thing. It's about the same ratio compared to a 5 series that we have seen in the past.

I hadn't thought of being able to track things that way, clever!

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Interesting discussion. The R1 appears to be squarely aimed at the professional press/sports photographers directly delivering jpeg's to customers. The most expensive camera's in the major companies' line-up are often directly compared to each other. But I'd argue they are positioned quite differently in the market by now.

The R1 and the a9 III compete pretty directly but the biggest competitor to the R1 is the R3.
The Z 9 arguably has to be compared because it is the closest that Nikon has.
In the real world, Nikon only has a small presence in photojournalism and sports photography.
Even the comparisons between the R1 and the a9 III are kind of meaningless.
It has more to do with whether the agency chooses to go with Sony or Canon.
I do not see agencies switching over these two cameras.
The biggest obstacles to R1 sales are the R3 and R5 II.
The R3 never was up to the level of a 1-class Canon camera but so many of us learned to live with the R3 and may get an R5 II rather than upgrade to an R1.
Many will get both which is what Canon optimally wants.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

It definitely is, a lot of wildlife photographers will be rolling with R1's as well, especially those that go into challenging environments.

Those are I the ones I emphasize most wanting more megapixels.
I have seen many stop complaining and buying R5 II cameras though.
I am not sure what the size of the market is for an R1 S but seeing the difference between the R3 and the R1 makes me understand why someone would want one.
Doing the math, I do not see why Canon can't make a 20 FPS R1 S with similar capabilities to the R1.
I do realize it is an engineering problem and not a math problem.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I do realize it is an engineering problem and not a math problem.

I suspect it’s neither. Rather, Canon understands the market and if launching an R1s would be profitable, they’d do so. That they haven’t suggests that sufficient demand isn’t there.

 

[koenkooi]

You frame that question as if you know the answer. Which you don't. Not to mention it really doesn't matter, since people can give an educated opinion even if they won't be buying a body like this.

On the other hand, what I can tell you with 100% certainty is that if this was a 45, 60, 90 or 180 mpix body there's at least one person that would buy it in a heatbeat - me.

Most replies have a certain type of energy: "The new Ferrari has fewer horsepower than the Bugatti, it's a bad car! No buy from me."

When accounts complain about not being to afford the 100-500L (it is an expensive lens, so nothing wrong with not being able to afford it) on one day and the next day imply that the only reason they aren't getting the R1 is the 24MP, I'm calling bullshit.

The R1 is outside my budget, even before factoring in new batteries, CFe cards and larger bags, so I never considered it.

 

[Hanley]

I had deformed balls in e-shutter and lighting issues.

Have you spoken to a doctor?

 

[DSB]

The obvious fact that relatively ignorant and stupid people dominate social media comment sections tells me that Canon has clearly made the correct decision.

If it wasn't called a "flagship," would you or others think differently? If they called the R5 II the flagship, would that make you happier? The fact that people get hung up on the label of "flagship" once again only proves how stupid people are. It means nothing, when you actually think about it. Every camera does what it does regardless of the label one puts on it.

The R3 was released 2 1/2 years ago. How huge a leap did you expect considering camera tech has reached a very high level of maturity in 2 1/2 years? And again, saying the specs are nothing more than a R3 mkII is a meaningless statement. Being a "mark II" is merely a label that does not say anything about the advancements in comparison to the mark I.

From the reviews I have seen, the R1's AF is considerably improved, with some new and unique features when it comes to subject detection. Quite frankly, I was very surprised by how much they have advanced the AF system in only 2 1/2 years since the R3's release.

You're doing some serious mental gymnastics here by implying that it's the users that were hung up on the "flagship" term, while clearly ignoring that it's Canon that has spent several years insisting that the "R3 IS NOT OUR FLAGSHIP, JUST WAIT AND SEE THE REAL FLAGSHIP!".

So people have waited. And people have seen. And now that R1 came out with specs that are eerily similar to R3 (or an imagined R3 mk2), here comes the fan brigade to call them ignorant and stupid.

It's not us that are insisting on "flagship" term, it's Canon. So when 3 years later they come out with a 24 megapixel fast camera and call it a flagship, of course people will say "hang on, Canon already had a 24 mpix fast camera, that they insisted wasn't a flagship, so how is this different?".

I'm wondering why you were very surprised by AF improvements? almost 3 years is a huge timeframe in tech, not to mention it's 3 years during which we've seen massive AI explosion. It's reasonable to expect that every single manufacturer is coming out with AI assisted camera features.

 

[DSB]

Most replies have a certain type of energy: "The new Ferrari has fewer horsepower than the Bugatti, it's a bad car! No buy from me."

When accounts complain about not being to afford the 100-500L (it is an expensive lens, so nothing wrong with not being able to afford it) on one day and the next day imply that the only reason they aren't getting the R1 is the 24MP, I'm calling bullshit.

The R1 is outside my budget, even before factoring in new batteries, CFe cards and larger bags, so I never considered it.

Not sure what you're talking about. I complained about price of 100-500? Where???

I already own 100-500, along with 12 other RF lenses and a budget of about $60k to invest in new gear in next 12 months. And I'm not even considering R1.

I will begrudgingly get the R5mk2, despite being disappointed by the same resolution as R5, simply because I'm too invested in RF system. But I will also start investing into Fuji GFX, because Canons current camera line up isn't catering to all my needs and I'm not willing to wait 3 more years to see if something changes when the next upgrade cycle comes around.

 

[koenkooi]

Not sure what you're talking about. I complained about price of 100-500? Where???

I already own 100-500, along with 12 other RF lenses and a budget of about $60k to invest in new gear in next 12 months. And I'm not even considering R1.

I will begrudgingly get the R5mk2, despite being disappointed by the same resolution as R5, simply because I'm too invested in RF system. But I will also start investing into Fuji GFX, because Canons current camera line up isn't catering to all my needs and I'm not willing to wait 3 more years to see if something changes when the next upgrade cycle comes around.

I wasn’t talking about you, I was talking about, among others, youtube and dpreview commenters.

 

[RikC]

Those are I the ones I emphasize most wanting more megapixels.
I have seen many stop complaining and buying R5 II cameras though.
I am not sure what the size of the market is for an R1 S but seeing the difference between the R3 and the R1 makes me understand why someone would want one.
Doing the math, I do not see why Canon can't make a 20 FPS R1 S with similar capabilities to the R1.
I do realize it is an engineering problem and not a math problem.

Well, that's what I thought as well.The old 1D X series was a go to camera for wild life and press/sports photographers. But while I think enough wildlife photographers will still be buying it because of it's ruggedness and familiar handling I can imagine they also may want higher resolution at some point. In a way it thus appears that the R1 is more niche than it's 1-series predecessors.

As to make the 1-series moniker more versatile again it wouldn't suprise me if a higher resolution variant will be released at some point. Once Canon has sufficient convidence in a higher resolution sensor and is able to get heat dissipation and overall performance with 8K video comparable or better than the R5 mk II with it's vented body in a the 1 series larger but non-vented housing. Because that's definitely going to be seen as a preresquisite for such a camera by the broader public regardless of whether many actual users will be using such functionality or not. Maybe that could have even part of the reason for Canon to keep on the conservative side with the MP count. If they would have gone to 36MP, a number which I see often mentioned, people would also start expecting superior 8K functionality.

 

[David - Sydney]

Doing the math, I do not see why Canon can't make a 20 FPS R1 S with similar capabilities to the R1.
I do realize it is an engineering problem and not a math problem.

It sounds like you want a R5ii in R1 form factor. Twin CFe, bigger buffer, bigger battery, AF knob, maybe more CPU horsepower/bandwidth for AF image processing, etc.

Canon could make one but currently forcing users to buy one or the other or both (even better for them).

The question is whether Canon could sell one in reasonable volumes at a reasonable margin in the future and I think that the answer is yes but not now.... but then the pundits would complain about how big, heavy and expensive it would be.

 

[David - Sydney]

That is great for my family snapshots, but less great for insects. Putting an AF point on the head of a butterfly and have the camera track it will have it wandering everywhere (wings, flower, background 2 meters away), but not track the head. Funnily enough, the OG EOS M does a better job at that than the R7. Switch the mode to 'people' and it locks on to the eyes of my kids 50 meters away.
I wish Canon would improve "track this distinctive pattern, it's not a subject you know about", or expand the subject detection support with insects

The butterfly pictures this morning did come out great, putting the small AF point manually on the eye or moustache worked as expected. I just wish I could really on AF tracking a lot more. In video mode the tracking is slightly better, but I can't figure out how to enable focus override when it inevitably wanders off to the background. With people, zero problems.

I have to agree... I end up using center point focus for underwater macro weird critters as it is mostly easier to align the focus where I want it even when it/me are moving constantly. IBIS is great though! Turtles/sharks/bigger critters are generally okay for eye-AF though.

What would be ideal is if the AI processor could learn from the subjects that you shoot. People are generic enough for Canon to release standard profiles and impress the vast majority (including me for people shots) but it would be very cool indeed if it could learn new subjects over time.
That the R1 can be "taught" which face to prioritise is promising in this case.

 

[DSB]

It sounds like you want a R5ii in R1 form factor. Twin CFe, bigger buffer, bigger battery, AF knob, maybe more CPU horsepower/bandwidth for AF image processing, etc.

Canon could make one but currently forcing users to buy one or the other or both (even better for them).

The question is whether Canon could sell one in reasonable volumes at a reasonable margin in the future and I think that the answer is yes but not now.... but then the pundits would complain about how big, heavy and expensive it would be.

Had Canon taken the R5mkII sensor and used it in R1, I guarantee that camera would've gotten a way better reactions on release. Just about all of the reviewers mention that R5mkII feels more like a flagship camera than R1.

The R5mkII should've been a 60+ mpix camera with most of the AF bells and whistles from R1, just a slower speed.

Both of these would sell like hotcakes.

This setup would allow Canon to continue R3 line as their fast camera for journalists and sports photographers. As things stand now, I'm pretty sure there will never be an R3mk2.

 

[David - Sydney]

Had Canon taken the R5mkII sensor and used it in R1, I guarantee that camera would've gotten a way better reactions on release. Just about all of the reviewers mention that R5mkII feels more like a flagship camera than R1.

"Flagship" as a term is just confusing and conflating the comparisons with different ecosystems.
Even the 1 series had 2 different lines before the 1DX reunited them.
Is the A1 or A9iii the flagship? They both have different characteristics (and lofty pricing)

The R5mkII should've been a 60+ mpix camera with most of the AF bells and whistles from R1, just a slower speed.
Both of these would sell like hotcakes.

Why 60+mp? Just to compete with Sony??
Nikon doesn't use 60mp and the increased linear benefit is small for most users. Is Nikon criticised for not having enough pixels?
Of course there are some that would welcome 100mp for their use cases but not for the majority.
The 5DS had 50mp but there weren't calls for Sony/Nikon to go beyond 42mp.
45mp is the current sweet spot for no-crop 8k raw video, high mp and speed.

The R5ii has most of the AF features from the R1 with a slower speed (probably same bandwidth given the great mp count). It is likely to be volume and sales winner for Canon similar to the R5.

This setup would allow Canon to continue R3 line as their fast camera for journalists and sports photographers. As things stand now, I'm pretty sure there will never be an R3mk2.

I agree that it is unlikely to be a R3ii. That isn't bad... just as the original R isn't bad but highly unlikely to have a mark ii.
Hopefully the R5 will have a permanent price drop and be retained within their market segmentation replacing the R.

 

[DSB]

"Flagship" as a term is just confusing and conflating the comparisons with different ecosystems.
Even the 1 series had 2 different lines before the 1DX reunited them.
Is the A1 or A9iii the flagship? They both have different characteristics (and lofty pricing)

Again, it's Canon that has insisted that R3 is NOT the flagship and that that coveted term is reserved for R1. It's not users, or reviewers that are conflating the comparisons, it's Canon. They are inviting everyone to compare flagships to flagships and that is exactly what people are doing.

Why 60+mp? Just to compete with Sony??
Nikon doesn't use 60mp and the increased linear benefit is small for most users. Is Nikon criticised for not having enough pixels?
Of course there are some that would welcome 100mp for their use cases but not for the majority.
The 5DS had 50mp but there weren't calls for Sony/Nikon to go beyond 42mp.
45mp is the current sweet spot for no-crop 8k raw video, high mp and speed.

The R5ii has most of the AF features from the R1 with a slower speed (probably same bandwidth given the great mp count). It is likely to be volume and sales winner for Canon similar to the R5.

To compete Canon would have to at least match Sony's current offerings, if not surpass them. Instead they're not doing either. With R1 it's the same story. Canon's fastest camera in terms of FPS doesn't even come close to matching the speeds of Sony's fastest camera.

And I agree about the R52 - that thing will sell, as it should. It's a good offering and much better proposition than R1.

 

[neuroanatomist]

To compete Canon would have to at least match Sony's current offerings, if not surpass them.

Competing in the minds and in the YouTube channels of people who were never going to buy one anyway is very different than competing in actual sales and visibility at major, televised events. The former has little to no bearing on the latter and is thus essentially irrelevant.

 

[David - Sydney]

Again, it's Canon that has insisted that R3 is NOT the flagship and that that coveted term is reserved for R1. It's not users, or reviewers that are conflating the comparisons, it's Canon. They are inviting everyone to compare flagships to flagships and that is exactly what people are doing. To compete Canon would have to at least match Sony's current offerings, if not surpass them. Instead they're not doing either. With R1 it's the same story..

Canon's flagship definition is the R1. It is a sports/action camera with the best AF that Canon can provide in a form factor that is ergonomic in portrait and landscape and rugged. Those definitions do not match Sony's definitions of flagship. It is designed to meet/exceed the expectations of the group of users who buy the R1.

Canon is not trying to directly compete with Sony/Nikon despite what you and reviewers are saying. They compare to get clicks and make users of other brands feel good about a halo model which they will never buy.

Canon's fastest camera in terms of FPS doesn't even come close to matching the speeds of Sony's fastest camera.

Canon offers 30 fps at full resolution in raw (hello Z9) without the image quality limitations of a current global shutter technology. The best AF with 100% vertical/ 90% horizontal sensor coverage and eye controlled. What Sony body has this?

There are caveats for all the "flagships (hello Sony marketing saying that the A9iii has no image degradation).
Even the R3 can do 196fps** vs only 120fps for the A9iii (see what I did there?)

Canon would expect that real life experience will trump spec sheet warriors especially when they don't read/understand the asterisks.

The whole overheating debate about 3 video modes of the R5 completely dominated the reviews and there was nothing on the market that could do 8kraw in a hybrid camera at all.... and the A1 still can't (CFe type A cards are too slow)! The R5c and Z9/8 can do 8k/60 and where is the Sony equivalent? We are seeing the same strange reactions now.