Canon EOS R5 Mark II going to 60mp? [CR1]

[usern4cr]

If the R5 II has 60MP, I'd be quite happy about it. A modest increase is probably the wisest decision they could make at this time frame.
What I hope for, more than that, is for lots of other things to be improved, such as the EVF resolution/visual FOV, QP AF, better firmware interface & features (eg aperture bracketing, 3D & motion limits for exposure, star tracking, all bracketing features with the current setting at the middle of the range etc).

 

[EOS 4 Life]

it’s Sigma that’s the 3rd 60MP competitor.

Can we really consider Sigma a competitor to Canon in the camera space?
People argue that Canon makes cameras to sell lenses.
Sigma only seems to make cameras because of the L mount alliance.
They mostly sell E-mount lenses even though their camera has an L-mount.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I\'d rather it be a stacked sensor at 45MP, with better low light focusing and quality, with NO video features

Canon can't put that genie back in the bottle.
The 5D II is arguably what made hybrid cameras the norm.
It would need a completely different name than the R5.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I understood your comment; mine was regarding the general purpose nature of the traditional 5 series. Maybe the 6 series line is now the new GP FF camera from Canon. I’ve been surprised at how many of these I’ve seen at various different types of events, used both for video and still.

I could argue that every Canon camera except the R3 and R5 C is GP.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

For years now, I have been wondering why camera manufacturers don't offer different choices of sensors within the same camera.

From my understanding, the image sensor is the most expensive single component in a camera.
The R5 and R6 are pretty much alike but the R5 would be less desirable in the R6 body and the R6 would be more expensive in the R5 body.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Which Nikon body is 60 megapixel?

Nothing yet.
I expect that they have the same rumor for the Z7 III and a Z7X to compete with the R5 S.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Hope Canon ups the R6III to 30MP- would be a sweetspot like the old EOS R.

I predict that they will do just that.
Same for the R3 II and R8 II.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Frankly, interesting that the rumor is for 60 MP. In terms of resolution it is only a modest increase from 45 MP.

I find it interesting that many people call 45-60 MP a modest increase but 24-30 life or death.
Many of the same people call 20-24 MP a modest increase.
It makes me wonder what is so magical about 30 MP.

 

[bergstrom]

Lol! 60mp!?! Actually i'm still very happy with 24mp. Does anyone really need 60mp?

yep

 

[Hector1970]

I’ve absolutely know nothing of Canons plans for an R5 II but I’d be completely surprised it’s not 60MP, 30FPS ( with choice of FPS) and a better focusing system. I love the rumours but could make this one up myself.

 

[tomscott]

A camera with a stacked sensor at 40 fps might be the future R1. Maybe?

If the R1 doesn't have that why would anyone buy it.

We got 40fps in the R6MKII and increased AF. TBH for anyone shooting moving subjects a stacked sensor is kind of a must. Really puts me off mirrorless, the AF is amazing but pointless if the images are warped.

With one hand giveth with another its taken away.

Plus the competition across the board are adding stacked sensors so Canon needs to follow suit.

 

[SnowMiku]

60MP for the R5 II seems like a logical next step up from the 45MP R5. Canon also previously said that they won't get left behind on the 8K features. For those who can afford the R5, I'm sure they can all afford the memory cards and hard drives for the extra space 60MP requires.

 

[AccipiterQ]

I’ll take 60MP into the mountains. The more cropping capabilities for critters the better. Also, I shoot a lot of video but 8K is overkill—wish there was a 4K RAW option.

YES.

I cannot tell you how many times I wish I had that option. I shoot quite a bit of video of my baby; I do a fair amount in 8K, but I would prefer 4K in a majority of cases. I hate losing the RAW option though, so I shoot 8K way more often than I would like. Same with my nature videos that I take.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Does anyone really need 60mp?

I wonder…what did people who ‘need’ 60 MP do a few years ago? Did they use MF digital cameras? Did they just not take pictures? If their answer to both of those is no, I question the ‘need’.

 

[neuroanatomist]

As long as I have the option to shoot small raw files. On the 5dMk4 I could shoot small raw files and that\'s what I used 99% for work.

Except that those files are not really RAW.

 

[JayLauz]

Two main things that I lack in my R5 is that is sometimes shows 'overheat" when shooting stills, and the other is that I would like it to have over 20fps as maximum shooting burst. Other than that, in most cases I can crop 1/10 of the frame and still get very sensible pictures.

I've never experienced overheating with mine, but I do agree that an option for 40fps mechanical shooting would've been great... Not enough to justify buying the Mark II, however.

 

[JayLauz]

I wonder…what did people who ‘need’ 60 MP do a few years ago? Did they use MF digital cameras? Did they just not take pictures? If their answer to both of those is no, I question the ‘need’.

I think the high megapixel count is just a marketing tactic for people who want the absolute best quality photos. However, for people who sell prints as part of their business, the higher the megapixel count, the better for that extra resolution. Once everything (phones, laptops, monitors) is using 8k screens, maybe then will 60MP be needed.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Yes, you are right! But what happens with the IQ in the process? If you increase just the numeric (huh, and it's connected with the price too!) and it doesn't deliver? Fortunately most of the increased "numerics" are delivering and in my own terminology it says: step up! How many "steps up it needs to get it really different - ask the guys who create that and the custumers are the judges!) The world of photography is huge and really (naturally!) divers! I think when the manufacturers are offering "more" it's good - at least if that "more" is visible in your photos!!! If some guys don't need some of the "numerics" they are not obligated to buy the new camera (like someone shooting in studio with controlled light and distance - just one of the examples!). The computers and the programs for developing your (RAW) photos are going in unison with the trend (and especially the computers/monitors are getting way chipper in the process!). And yes: I'm talking from the point of view of wild-life shooter but I believe it's not hardly connected only to that category!

My point is that it really doesn’t matter, manufacturers must always release a model that ‘improves’ on its predecessor in some ways. With mature products, those improvements are typically marginal. Is 40 fps really better than 30 fps? But…it’s more.

 

[JayLauz]

I would love a "super" R5. 45Mpixel sensor but using R3's technology, much less rolling shutter, more (but configurable) frames per second, better/faster AF.

Anyway R5II and R1 are under development. We will see next year....

This I could get behind. It's too bad that the current R5 doesn't have similar AF features as the R3. I don't see eye tracking autofocus as a need, but a reduced and controlled rolling shutter and higher controllable fps would be awesome. The AF is still lightning quick, I can't imagine how much better it can get compared to the R3.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I've never experienced overheating with mine, but I do agree that an option for 40fps mechanical shooting would've been great...

I don’t think you’re ever going to see 40 FPS with a mechanical shutter.