Canon EOS R1 Specifications [CR2]

[AJ]

A high dynamic range sensor is needed to capture high dynamic range scenes, it's pretty simple.

Yes, exactly. And high dynamic range scenes are likely to occur given the R1 target audience of photojournalists, sports shooters, events shooters, and wedding 'togs. These types of subjects aren't typically lit with studio lights, or lend themselves to leisurely exposure bracketing. For example, when shooting a soccer match in harsh light, one does not put away the camera gear to wait for softer lighting conditions.

 

[neurorx]

Price will be interesting given these specs and the initial starting asking price for the R3. 2K more seems a lot.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Yes, exactly. And high dynamic range scenes are likely to occur given the R1 target audience of photojournalists, sports shooters, events shooters, and wedding 'togs. These types of subjects aren't typically lit with studio lights, or lend themselves to leisurely exposure bracketing. For example, when shooting a soccer match in harsh light, one does not put away the camera gear to wait for softer lighting conditions.

Question: how did photographers manage to shoot such scenes without high dynamic range sensors? Another question: will the Sony a9III be able to shoot such scenes?

Those can be considered rhetorical. I suspect we all know that high dynamic range scenes in sports, events, and weddings have been and will continue to be successfully captured as powerful images with a little bit less of the full scene dynamic range being recorded.

 

[SteveC]

Thanks! I do appreciate the compliments!

I would just say that, in the not so distant past, many claims about noise and DR improvements have been made for many cameras... and in many cases those improvements have been hardly any material at all, let alone visible in ways that matter to photographers.

So I will wait for the R1 to come out and be properly tested.

This does not change the fact that, should the resolution be indeed 30mp, I will not buy it and will keep my fingers crossed for the R5 II.

A quick checkout of what you posted here; I see you've been to Rome, as have I. You took the more interesting pictures. (I don't believe I even had a wide angle with me.)

 

[Quarkcharmed]

Yea sure. Where 10 to 11 stops isn’t sufficient the additional 1 or 2 isn’t much help.

It actually is.
+1 stop means 2 times greater tonal range, +2 stops - 4 times greater.
I'm doing much less of exposure blending with the R5 than I used to do with the 5DIV, and the R5's DR only about 1 stop better.

 

[Del Paso]

The way I read it, 45 MP is low-res.

But "the blurry cropped birds"???
Since when is it impossible to photograph birds with a 30MP sensor fitted camera?
So many great bird pictures have been taken with even less (not by me...)

 

[3kramd5]

Question: how did photographers manage to shoot such scenes without high dynamic range sensors? Another question: will the Sony a9III be able to shoot such scenes?

Those can be considered rhetorical. I suspect we all know that high dynamic range scenes in sports, events, and weddings have been and will continue to be successfully captured as powerful images with a little bit less of the full scene dynamic range being recorded.

Yes, people will have to be content to let shadows remain shadows.

 

[Del Paso]

Yes, exactly. And high dynamic range scenes are likely to occur given the R1 target audience of photojournalists, sports shooters, events shooters, and wedding 'togs. These types of subjects aren't typically lit with studio lights, or lend themselves to leisurely exposure bracketing. For example, when shooting a soccer match in harsh light, one does not put away the camera gear to wait for softer lighting conditions.

Often the same needs in landscape photography. High contrasts can make scenery interesting.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

Yes, exactly. And high dynamic range scenes are likely to occur given the R1 target audience of photojournalists, sports shooters, events shooters, and wedding 'togs. These types of subjects aren't typically lit with studio lights, or lend themselves to leisurely exposure bracketing. For example, when shooting a soccer match in harsh light, one does not put away the camera gear to wait for softer lighting conditions.

The DR advantage against the A9III will be most noticeable before ISO 250. At higher ISOs the DR graphs will probably converge, similar to this

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

www.photonstophotos.net

Sony, I guess, is relying on the idea that A9 series cameras aren't used much at low ISOs anyway.

 

[Del Paso]

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

"But all my numerous friends have jumped ship because: (select adequate reason) DR, lower MP, no 3rd party, overheating etc...".
Isn't it a sure indication of Canon's threatening bankrupcy?

 

[scyrene]

Yes, people will have to be content to let shadows remain shadows.

 

[exige24]

This is an R3 MkII. Yeah, no thanks!

Not impressed at all considering its more than likely $7000 price point.

 

[Sporgon]

It actually is.
+1 stop means 2 times greater tonal range, +2 stops - 4 times greater.
I'm doing much less of exposure blending with the R5 than I used to do with the 5DIV, and the R5's DR only about 1 stop better.

Interesting you say that, because Bill Claff of photons to photos ’site identified that the R5 is using mild, but baked in noise reduction in (probably) just the lowest lowlights of the image. When pushed on DPR forums to say how much effect it was having on dynamic range he replied that it’s impossible for him to measure, but his best guess was around one third to two thirds of a stop of extra range at base ISO. So if you take away this baked in noise reduction the R5’s dynamic range at 100 iso is actually the same as the 5Div. This was the point of my original reply to @Anon (I think it was); Canon were going to make damned sure that the internet reviewers like DPR weren’t going to be able to say of the R5 “nice camera but DR still lags behind competitors”.
With your 5Div try selecting just the low values in a demanding high DR raw image scene, say 0 to 8, fuzz it and make a new layer with it and then apply a little noise reduction to that layer, then merge down to one layer again before you begin any editing of the image, so just the lowlights have NR. You might be surprised by the results, almost R5-like
I looked at your images on 500px and see you like to shoot into the dying sun; they are nicely done and don’t look at all “HDR”.

 

[AlanF]

The DR advantage against the A9III will be most noticeable before ISO 250. At higher ISOs the DR graphs will probably converge, similar to this

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

www.photonstophotos.net

Sony, I guess, is relying on the idea that A9 series cameras aren't used much at low ISOs anyway.

The R3 in the plot has noise reduction applied to RAW, for whatever that is worth, as indicated by the triangles.

 

[roby17269]

A quick checkout of what you posted here; I see you've been to Rome, as have I. You took the more interesting pictures. (I don't believe I even had a wide angle with me.)

Thanks!
I am actually more of a tele kind of guy, but I kind of like extreme focal lengths (fun!) and, as it happened, I had received the 10-20 right before the trip. So I had to give it a spin.
I did like it but I definitely used it more at 20mm rather than at 10mm. Which kind of defeats the purpose... but I found it challenging to get interesting compositions at 10mm.
But I do believe that wides are suited for architecture - cityscapes shots.

 

[roby17269]

Often the same needs in landscape photography. High contrasts can make scenery interesting.

Indeed, depending on the feelings you are trying to communicate with you image...

In the distant past I used to do HDR images by taking multiple exposures with the king of DR (not) 5D mkII.
I used a partially manual method by manually mixing different versions of the same images obtained by using the different tone mapping options in PS. My last step was always to dial contrast back in. This way I was reducing the DR a bit, but not only the results were more of my liking, they were also less HDR-esque, which is something I did not like apart from very specific cases (e.g. old rusty car relics).

 

[hawe2020]

One spec missing: price...

 

[danfaz]

This is an R3 MkII. Yeah, no thanks!

Not impressed at all considering its more than likely $7000 price point.

I noticed you don't have an R3 listed in your signature. Do you have experience with it?
Would you buy the R1 if it was impressive to you?

 

[neuroanatomist]

I noticed you don't have an R3 listed in your signature. Do you have experience with it?
Would you buy the R1 if it was impressive to you?

The 2023 Lamborghini Huracán Sterrato is a little light on horsepower. It really needs at least 650 hp instead of only ~600 hp. If it had more, I’d certainly buy it. Maybe with the 2024 model they will step up their game. How do they expect to compete with Ferrari?

Meanwhile, I need to run an errand. Headed out to my Subaru.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

Interesting you say that, because Bill Claff of photons to photos ’site identified that the R5 is using mild, but baked in noise reduction in (probably) just the lowest lowlights of the image. When pushed on DPR forums to say how much effect it was having on dynamic range he replied that it’s impossible for him to measure, but his best guess was around one third to two thirds of a stop of extra range at base ISO.

Yes I'm well aware of that and even mentioned it in this thread earlier.
If we assume the R5 and R7 use the same or similar 'sensor tech' in terms of noise, we can make this extrapolation from the R7 to the R5 (Canon doesn't cook shadows in the R7):

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

The difference will be just 0.3 stops, so the noise reduction in the R5 probably only makes a 1/3 stops improvement.

Of course the above is just a guess and the exact difference is very hard or maybe impossible to measure without getting an uncooked raw from the R5. It's very sad that Magic Lantern has been abandoned.

So if you take away this baked in noise reduction the R5’s dynamic range at 100 iso is actually the same as the 5Div.

It appears to be better even if you consider the noise reduction in the R5's raws.

With your 5Div try selecting just the low values in a demanding high DR raw image scene, say 0 to 8, fuzz it and make a new layer with it and then apply a little noise reduction to that layer, then merge down to one layer again before you begin any editing of the image, so just the lowlights have NR. You might be surprised by the results, almost R5-like

I don't have 5DIV anymore... So it's hard to do the proper comparison in the field. But the shadows from the R5 raws are more usable. I've been doing ETTR with both cameras so trying to maximise the DR utilisation.

I looked at your images on 500px and see you like to shoot into the dying sun; they are nicely done and don’t look at all “HDR”.

Thanks! I think "HDR look" is just a poorly done tone mapping. HDR merge/blending doesn't necessarily result in "HDR look", moreover, you actually have to put some effort in order to achieve the infamous HDR look.