Canon EOS R1 Specifications [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
The whole concept of a flagship is to tout who you are and what you're capable of. An individual successful photographer is going to make a choice to buy a specific camera based on a variety of factors including what currently available equipment fits their use case and budget the best, but the surrounding ecosystem and what lenses etc they already own will factor in as well. Not everyone who will ever be in the market for a Canon flagship camera is a current EOS 1-series owner already; some of them are not Canon owners, and some of them aren't even camera owners yet. I think if you're looking at buying into an ecosystem for the first time, you are not only considering that your current needs are (you may be shopping for an R7 or an R10), but you're also looking at what that ecosystem offers, and where you think it will be going. I believe that the entire ecosystem is less likely to attract new customers if new customers (who may not be as sophisticated when it comes to evaluating camera technology and specific professions' needs as some of the people here) perceive that a company's overall technology is not as good as their competitors.
Upvote
0
It’s not that it’s less important, it’s that canon/nikon/sony are generally within spitting distance. Upshot is that it’s just no longer a point of differentiation for Sony. Canon was behind, and the 5D3 -> 5D4 was a big jump in IQ, and now the battle is about readout speed.
Back in the day when Canon had silky smooth base ISO cause they were on CMOS and Nikon was CCD, that was a huge win for Canon. Then others caught up and that narrative was no longer accurate.
Its just how progress works in duopoly situations.
Upvote
0
Sony really goes after that market and it seems to be paying off.
Most Youtubers who use Canon barely mention it.
Upvote
0
The A9III has a really IQ problem ! Pay a $6000 camera to have a 15 years back in Time is...not for me !
Clearly, if Canon and Nikon release a +-30 MP stacked sensor camera with +-80 FPS, they will kill the A9III.
Upvote
0
With the a9III having 2 stops less base ISO DR than the R3 and likely a greater gap from the R1 (if the rumor of the R1 having more DR than the R3 is true), it becomes a point of differentiation against Sony. Not that the 'influencers' will dwell on that point. If they mention it at all, it will be in passing as a worthwhile sacrifice for the speed of a global shutter and that for the target audience high ISO is more important anyway. Not that the 'for the target audience high ISO is more important' argument worked when it was Canon having better high ISO performance.
Upvote
0
You missed @USMarineCorpsVet saying it doesn't matter anyway. Because that's what people who can't admit they were wrong about something do. He also seems confused about who made the claim in the first place. Lol.
Upvote
0
Some thoughts:
1. I hope Quad pixel is on the table.
2. If 30Mpixel at 40fps is possible why not 40Mpixel at 30fps? OK I understand it is not a serious question but that would make it a super birding camera but maybe a little less than a super sports camera. Or Canon is not quite there for stacked sensors with higher mpixels. Since even the 1 series is increasing in mpixels it will go eventually there.
1. I hope Quad pixel is on the table.
2. If 30Mpixel at 40fps is possible why not 40Mpixel at 30fps? OK I understand it is not a serious question but that would make it a super birding camera but maybe a little less than a super sports camera. Or Canon is not quite there for stacked sensors with higher mpixels. Since even the 1 series is increasing in mpixels it will go eventually there.
Upvote
0
I'd argue Sony knows the TECHNOLOGY, better than they know the market. If they can build it, they probably will. Betamax and minidisc being two famous examples of them pushing a technology arguably superior, and which worked, but for various reasons didn't widely crack in to the market. If Canon's rolling shutter speeds are as rumored, the GS phenomenon may be short lived. Or it may just become another parallel equivalent as BSI/FSI non-stacked sensors are now.
We're all just here reading tea leaves. But the lack of evidence that the 50mp A1 wasn't a mistake does not make it evidence that at 30mp R1 IS a mistake. That type of reasoning is a logical fallacy, based on confirmation bias. Really, only time will tell. They have the market research, and we do not. But the R1 will likely sell out as it always does. It looks like Sony is positioning its line up with a medium speed high MP A1, and a faster mid-res A9 line. Will canon do an R1 in the 30s, and R3mkII that slower but higher res? An R1S? Will the R5mkII be the high MP medium speed body?
Whatever the answers, we know a few truths.
- Some folks will be hurt and feel 'forced' to switch systems. Let down by an evil corporation that can't see the pure simple truth of their needs
- the number of switchers will not affect the top or bottom line of either company in a meaningful way
- the cameras that are declared dead on arrival by the forums due to bad spec sheets will be used by thousands and produce great results
- The performance difference between the top Sony and Canon models will continue to be effectively very small
Upvote
0
That is a very expensive choice.
It also would not be ideal for someone who prefers Canon.
I do not expect the R5 II to be much like the Z 8.
I look forward to seeing many of the same people who are chastising people who are not happy the hypothetical R1 does not match the a1 whine when the R5 II does not match the Z 8.
Upvote
0
I do not think that is the approach for flagships.
The a1 may have changed that a bit though.
Upvote
0
With the a9III having 2 stops less base ISO DR than the R3 and likely a greater gap from the R1 (if the rumor of the R1 having more DR than the R3 are true), it becomes a point of differentiation against Sony. Not that the 'influencers' will dwell on that point. If they mention it at all, it will be in passing as a worthwhile sacrifice for the speed of a global shutter and that for the target audience high ISO is more important anyway. Not that the 'for the target audience high ISO is more important' argument worked when it was Canon having better high ISO performance.
I don’t want to totally minimize the impact of Sony’s ability to court influencers—it’s real and it bothers the hell out of me—but there’s a meaningful difference between having a lineup with tradeoffs and Canon’s position pre 1DX3/5D4 or so. Sony offers options if you don’t want to incur the global shutter penalty, Canon did not realistically have an option if you needed to optimize for DR. I might have particularly mud-colored glasses here as that was the gen I went from 60D (which had gross banding even 2-3 stops down) and to a 5D4 (no DR/read noise complaints at all) but the Sony sensors were certainly a solid generation or so ahead of where Canon was.
Doesn’t mean Canon was doooomed but they did have their work cut out, and IMO all the sturm un drang about Canon not being able to compete ended up delivering us some exceptional cameras the last generation with the R5, 6, 3.
Upvote
0
Good points. But I can't help imagining what the internet would have done if Canon had just launched a camera with a global shutter and less than 10 stops of DR at base ISO. Doom, indeed.
Upvote
0
Oh they’d be eviscerated for sure. There’s absolutely bias in the youtube gear review world and people love an easy narrative.
Upvote
0
It is really hard to determine that way.
It Nikon made the R5 and Canon made the Z 8 then I doubt the sales would be the same.
The overall brand and lens selections come into play.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
