Canon EOS R1 Specifications [CR2]

[Bob Howland]

Well said, in fact at the same output size as the 5DIII the S is considerably better. It sits somewhere between the III and the IV.

I agree with you...kind of. I own both a 5D3 and 5DS. I typically use the 5DS at M2 image quality (22MP) and can't really tell the difference between the two. However, the 5D3 seems better above ISO3200. I bought the 5DS on the day that Canon lowered the price by 65%.

 

[bbasiaga]

Many bird photographers want a weatherproof body with a large battery that can move big primes quickly. We photograph small birds from long distances and crop substantially. It's not just getting a high megapixel camera. It's simply getting a legit camera that can match what other companies offer. Canon still doesn't have a camera that can compare to the Z9, and that's a two year old camera. They basically put out a R3 MK2. Point me to a camera in the Canon lineup that has a pro body with the ergonomics and weatherproofing of 1-series and has 45 mpx (which is not even considered excessive in 2024). Why be an apologist and insist that no one wants or needs a camera similar to the Z9 which was a game changer for Nikon, the same way the 5D MK2 was a game changer for Canon over a decade ago.

Nikon is clearly the laggard in AF systems. Though they are at least approaching the same arena with the newest Zs, and are functionally good. But the R5/6 series bodies have better AF than Nikon's flagship. Functionally good----a theme as we talk about the minor differences in technology in modern cameras.

I am not sure there will be one. The EOS 3 was a one and done camera, and I think the R3 will be one too, since (as others have mentioned), that this spec list reads like an R3 successor.

Maybe an R1S at some point if Canon decides that splitting the 1 series back into two (like the old 1D / 1DS split) is a good idea.

R3mkII was rumored here as being on the plan for 2025...of course we'll have to wait and see. Maybe it will be the R1S replacement....

I guess you don't realize that market share doesn't just include high end models. They have market share because they sell a good amount of all types of cameras, the vast majority of them to complete amateur hobbyists!

Sony has some contracts with agenecies that put a lot of their bodies in pro's hands for events. Canon as well. Nikon hardly any. There is no evidence that Canon lags the market share at the top or middle markets. I think there was a news article last year, or maybe 2022, that the R5 had sold some staggering amount of copies.

Nikon's Z9 seems to be the clear winner for resolution, if this report is true.

If PJ and Sports are the target market 30MP will do.

For the BIF shooters, that have tried the Z9, the enhanced resolution and room for crops has been well received.

Something in me, tells me that the final R1 will have better specs. If these specs are true, then the R3 was the intended R1 and Nikon ruined Canon's party

I'll say it again - IF this camera has 30mp, its because Canon's knowledge of pro shooters in the intended market WANTED the resolution around there. Forum dwelling bird guys like us seem to value MP. But we will be about 10% or less of R1 sales regardless of if its resolution matches our desires or not.

 

[3kramd5]

Dynamic Range isn't "Image quality". Its signal + noise. Period.

No, it isn't. It is a ratio.

You can measure from the files or you can get an o'scope or spectrum analyzer and measure the circuit. I've done it myself for over 40 years.

Cool story. But you can't measure image quality.

 

[3kramd5]

In fact a better sensor (which includes a higher dynamic range) gives me more creative freedom, if I know how to use the advantages. For example, thanks to a higher DR in the R5 (compared to 5DIV), I'm doing much much less of exposure blending; most of the time I only need one shot for a scene. I can take variations but I don't need to shoot 2-3 bracketed frames every time. And it's easier to do postprocessing. There's more than just the high DR, but the point is, it's not bad to have a better camera, if you actually need it and know how to use it.

It's certainly not bad. For single exposures, I do think we're near diminishing DR returns as it pertains to noise, though. Increasing well capacity, or introducing modulo software, would open it up again. And that's perhaps where there is a natural split in camera design: those aimed at quick exposures, and those aimed at long exposures.

 

[tbgtomcom]

For me, the big potential winner is better Autofocus. The AF on my R5 is already amazing, but I hear people talk about the R6II being better, the R3 better, especially in low light. I am interested in what the R1 will bring to the table and with the first two bullets dedicated to AF, I am hoping there is something there.

The sensor readout speed of 0.8 milliseconds (what I think Craig meant) is outstanding and actually correlates to the 1/1250 = 0.0008 sec or 0.8 millisec syn speed (also great).

The prebuffer of 1 sec. If implemented well, this will be another incredibly welcome feature. The implementation in the M6II is clunky.

Then it sounds like fps will be up to 120 fps continues, 240 burst. I so do not want that. But give me control over selecting my fps up to about 30 fps and that would be very welcome.

Better DR is always welcome, but usually more of a marketing statement. If more than 1/3 of a stop, I will be curious if it is manipulation. I am not sure how much more can be done to get more out of the sensor, but this could be Canon adjusting the image after capture somehow. We'll see.

I haven't seen any significant autofocus benefits between the R62 over the R5.

 

[docsmith]

I haven't seen any significant autofocus benefits between the R62 over the R5.

Good to hear.

 

[tbgtomcom]

I do find it mildly ironic that here on the Canon forums some people wished that the camera had more pixels similar to the Z9 while on the Nikon forums some people wished the Nikon Z9 had fewer pixels for better high ISO without having to downsample the image.

In my group, ALL the other shooters are Z9s, and they love the 45mp, haven't heard a single complaint.

 

[Del Paso]

Then Canon introduced the 5D2 with the same pixel count as the 1Ds3 and the market for the 1Ds3 disappeared. A local camera store ended up selling their two1Ds3 bodies on ebay. Nikon had a comparable model, the D3X, that they replaced with a less rugged body and 50% more pixels but selling for 60% less money.

The reality of cameras in the R1 and Z9 class is that they are built for professionals who absolutely have to get the shot but then are often purchased by wealthy amateurs like Neuro. The professionals don't need a lot of pixels because their images are rarely enlarged to wall-filling size. You can get a very nice 20x30 print with a 12.8MP body and I have a couple waterfall landscape prints on my living room wall to prove it.

About your kit, what provoked you to buy MFT? I'm getting to the age where light weight equipment is desirable and I very nearly bought a duplicate OMD setup. Mostly it was nostalgia for the days when I backpacked and walked up creeks to photograph waterfalls. Anyway, I bought a Canon R7, about the same size as the OM-1, instead.

I too was thinking about an OM1, for some (rare) occasions when FF simply is too cumbersome .
I already own a small EPL 5, which I like for picture quality, but hate for size and ergonomics.
Finally, I rejected the OM1, for being too small in my hands, and, as you wrote, the EOS R7 seems a better alternative. Better ergonomics, better handling and useful with long focals.

 

[AJ]

I think the read time of <0.8 microsecond should be corrected to <0.8 milli-second. 0.8 Micro-second is insane

Pity there's no mention of the 2nd gen Eye-controlled AF or quad-pixel AF enabling AI subject-recognition, though we know both are on the R1 spec sheet. Hopefully the next update will shed more light on these features but otherwise very solid upgrade from the 1Dx mark III and if they keep the price around $6K they will tempt a lot of R3 owners to upgrade.

Good catch. The 1/1250 synch speed is equivalent to 0.8 ms, not microseconds.

 

[Bob Howland]

I'll say it again - IF this camera has 30mp, its because Canon's knowledge of pro shooters in the intended market WANTED the resolution around there. Forum dwelling bird guys like us seem to value MP. But we will be about 10% or less of R1 sales regardless of if its resolution matches our desires or not.

Marketing research isn't quite that simple and it certainly isn't that precise. You say "pro shooters in the intended market WANTED the resolution around here". Actually some percentage of them want 30MP and superior high ISO behavior, some percentage want 45MP and some percentage want a global shutter and some percentage are willing to pay X price to have their preferred attribute. For one thing, the researcher has to measure the STRENGTH of the preference, because there's lots of overlap. I haven't done a lot of marketing research but I've seen enough to see how Canon, Nikon and Sony could all come out with models with different emphasis.

 

[Software2]

I was kinda hoping the R1 would be the "low-res" camera at 45mp, and the R5 Mk II would be the the high res option. But with the R1 being slightly less than the original R, that dream dies. And with the Mk II being pushed back yet again... there is only sadness and blurry cropped birds that fly away if I get closer than 100 feet from them.

 

[danfaz]

there is only sadness and blurry cropped birds that fly away if I get closer than 100 feet from them.

What gear are you using now? You don't need an R1 or R5II to get sharp images of birds at distance.

 

[Del Paso]

I was kinda hoping the R1 would be the "low-res" camera at 45mp, and the R5 Mk II would be the the high res option. But with the R1 being slightly less than the original R, that dream dies. And with the Mk II being pushed back yet again... there is only sadness and blurry cropped birds that fly away if I get closer than 100 feet from them.

I really do not understand what you are saying. Sorry!

 

[downhill on water]

There are many references to sales volumes and market leaders in this thread. Does anyone know how to get data on number of units sold of cameras relevant to this thread, i.e. R5, R3, Z9, Z8, A1, A9? Total units or a major market, or large retailers? If available, it would help bring clarity to which companies strategies are winning over photographers....

 

[neuroanatomist]

... there is only sadness and blurry cropped birds that fly away if I get closer than 100 feet from them.

I can relate. I had that problem sometimes when I first got interested in shooting birds. Then I learned some field craft, and got a lens longer than the EF 100/2.8L I was using at first. But here's one of those early shots (Rebel T1i/500D and 100/2.8L).

 

[Sporgon]

I can relate. I had that problem sometimes when I first got interested in shooting birds. Then I learned some field craft, and got a lens longer than the EF 100/2.8L I was using at first. But here's one of those early shots (Rebel T1i/500D and 100/2.8L).

View attachment 214293

You can tell from the look on that eagle’s face that he’s mortified you’ve been able to take his picture with a 500D

 

[Akul]

Hello everyone. Decade reader, rarely writter.
Using R5+100-500 for some years now. Yes, t his combo improved my bird photography, but even more so improvement came from my sneaking skills/gear: mostly camo suit, camo net, proper rubber swamp boots, better patience, earlier getting up and comming to field before dawn. All in all maybe 200e worth investment. So yeah, 30mpix in my book is nice, for 1d class, but after being used to 45mpix of R5, I will probably wait R5II. Tho, I wish some 1d stuff in R5II, mostly, if possible, spot metering connected to activated AF point, maybe slightly quicker acquisition of target or slightly better sticking to targets that are close to busy background than to me. R5 is a beast already, and I can only imagine possibilities of a body like new R1. I will attach not spectacular image of kingfisher, that I managed to crawl upon actively (he didn't come to my perch) just to show it to ppl with shorter reach that it is possible withiut 7k body or 15k lens, they shouldn't give up hope.

 

[Akul]

 

[kaihp]

Only point I disagree with is that they believe their software is great. It’s a virtual certainty that they’ve got design and product folks in house who know DPP isn’t very good. But the higher up product folks know they don’t “need” to make it better. If I were a shareholder I wouldn’t necessarily disagree with the business decision, but as an end user I just thinking “if something is worth doing right…”

I've been using DPP for 20 nearly years (purchased a 10D in March 2004) and if there's two things I'd like to have fixed and would increase the usability of the DPP immensely would be:

1. Raw file loading time. Even if they cannot figure it out themselves, go buy/license the engine from FastRawViewer.
2. File export time. An export and conversion to jpeg takes 30sec/image.

 

[3kramd5]

You can tell from the look on that eagle’s face that he’s mortified you’ve been able to take his picture with a 500D

I think he's more upset that you called him an eagle!