Canon EOS R5 Mark II unconfirmed specifications

[R1-7D]

I sincerely hope they added the optical back button. It is a million times more useful than the eye tracking autofocus.

Disagree. While I know some people love the Smart Controller, I hardly ever use mine on the R3; for me, the Eye Control AF is WAY faster and more accurate. I'd happily give up the Smart Controller for Eye Control.

Of course, I might be in the minority on this point. I absolutely love Eye Control.

EDIT: I should mention that I enjoy using the Smart Controller for quickly navigating through details on magnified image previews, whether in the viewfinder or on the camera's back screen

 

[ShowMeTheEagles]

I sincerely hope they added the optical back button. It is a million times more useful than the eye tracking autofocus.

100%. Eye-focus is a useless gimmick. I’m still unconvinced it will be an R5 II feature. The multi-mode or optical button is a next-level game changer.

 

[ShowMeTheEagles]

And hopefully Pre-Capture

I’m sure it will have pre-capture. I just hope it doesn’t require Canon s/w to extract like the R7 does.

 

[Jodumedia]

So Curious about these possible video features. Which ones come will help determine if (when only looking at video) the R5II be a big enough upgrade over R5C.

Maybe some of these would only available with cooling attachment or something, that way they can still get the revenue similar to the R5C.

BTW this not a complaint. I am sure there will be a true cinema option at some point in some form, Just writing out my thoughts.

1. Faster Readout Speeds
   Due to Stacked Sensor (helpful in some scenarios but not a huge deal over R5C)
2. 16 stops of Dynamic Range vs 15 (of R5? )
   Cinema Raw Light plus cinema algorithms gave R5C about 3/4 of stop more than R5 already. So this improvement probably needs to be a real world 1.5-2 stops to matter to me.
3. C-Log2
   This would be great if #2 works out. So this might be a good reason to upgrade.
4. Some Cinema Video Features
   Would love video features of R5C. I am not expecting the cinema menu but hoping for ...
   False Color,
   Good Waveforms,
   anamorphic de-squeeze,
   Shutter Angle,
   Cinema Raw Light codecs instead of Canon Raw.
5. 8k60p
6. Full 8k 12bit Raw video output via HDMI and/or USB for all RAW frame rates.
   or.... ProRes internal recording but I would be shocked if that happened

 

[davidhfe]

Low key favorite feature here is the full size HDMI port. I don't personally care (do little video, never used an external recorder) but it this was a huge gripe and I'm glad canon's listening.

I am gonna be so crushed when it's confirmed there's no optical AF selector. I just don't see how canon can hold that back on a four thousand USD body.

 

[Gendra]

I am gonna be so crushed when it's confirmed there's no optical AF selector. I just don't see how canon can hold that back on a four thousand USD body.

IIRC after seeing actual images of the R5 II body canonrumors explicitly stated it will not have the smart controller, so unfortunately it's pretty likely it won't come to the R5

 

[David Hull]

I am going to play devils advocate here. Image quality is now basically irrelevant. DR, colour space etc. All brands and cameras are more than adequate and nobody will ever notice a difference. It is things like build quality, pre capture etc that make a difference but not very much of one anymore.

Thank God. So, Canon isn't doomed after all .

 

[jam05]

I am going to play devils advocate here. Image quality is now basically irrelevant. DR, colour space etc. All brands and cameras are more than adequate and nobody will ever notice a difference. It is things like build quality, pre capture etc that make a difference but not very much of one anymore.

IQ may be one's personal preference. Dynamic Range is a hardware spec. Noise + signal. Period. That's what I'm paying for and can't be changed with a firmware update. One is paying for the hardware. $4000 for a noisy imaging system is actually archaic. And yeah you can tell the difference if your 2024 device has less dynamic range as that as one 10 years ago you've been bamboozled. I can care less about options that can be firmware programmed and downloaded. I can't download dynamic range from $4000 hardware. Like that Sony A9III. All the firmware in the world will not change the signal loss. That is what I'm paying for. Signal + noise. Hardware.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Dynamic Range is a hardware spec. Noise + signal. Period.

Math is hard. Perhaps you should go bake cookies…you might be better at that.

 

[Slasheal]

Guys, the 16 bits are in picture mode, not in video, unless it's a dgo sensor but then it would be a better video camera than the c400 which I doubt..

 

[jam05]

Tell that crap to those taking night photos of the galaxy and Milky Way. Tell them that less signal won't make any difference and they can't tell the difference. Such rediculous bs. Dynamic range is the most fundamental, basic, and rudimentary characteristic of signal processing. How much signal is there above the noise. No it is not a characteristic that magically can be restored with a firmware update.

 

[davidhfe]

IIRC after seeing actual images of the R5 II body canonrumors explicitly stated it will not have the smart controller, so unfortunately it's pretty likely it won't come to the R5

shhhh let me have this week to dream

 

[Gendra]

It would be amazing if the DR turned out to be as good as claimed. I’m skeptical but I’d love to be wrong.

If it is, it will likely come with a lot of asterisks in the manual, be prepared for a very narrow set of circumstances where it will work as advertised.

I believe, the biggest "asterisks" (if you can call it that way) will be how the DR is measured and how the current mark 1 model would score in the same measurement.

When looking at the data from photonstophotos then the R5 mark 1 is rated at 12 stops, and I see now way on earth that the new model could have 4 stops more in the same typo of measurement (*). However other pages like DxO rate the R5 at 14,6 then this would reduce it to a 1,4 stop improvement. Which in my opinion would still be way to optimistic. I would even be baffeled, when the mark 2 is able to score a full stop higher in the photonstophoto test.

(*) One exception would be, if it does something like software HDR, where it takes two images in a super quick burst and create a "dual-exposure" RAW in analogy to a dual-gain readout. Similar to the classical HDR images with exposure bracketing and combining in post only faster.

 

[Deleted member 396548]

Is it possible that "16+ stops of dynamic range" may be indicating a DGO sensor in the R5 II?

 

[wyotex43n]

And hopefully Pre-Capture

Yes and well implemented.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

How much signal is there above the noise.

No it's not how dynamic range is defined, but you keep repeating this 'signal + noise' formula.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

I believe, the biggest "asterisks" (if you can call it that way) will be how the DR is measured and how the current mark 1 model would score in the same measurement.

When looking at the data from photonstophotos then the R5 mark 1 is rated at 12 stops, and I see now way on earth that the new model could have 4 stops more in the same typo of measurement (*). However other pages like DxO rate the R5 at 14,6 then this would reduce it to a 1,4 stop improvement. Which in my opinion would still be way to optimistic. I would even be baffeled, when the mark 2 is able to score a full stop higher in the photonstophoto test.

(*) One exception would be, if it does something like software HDR, where it takes two images in a super quick burst and create a "dual-exposure" RAW in analogy to a dual-gain readout. Similar to the classical HDR images with exposure bracketing and combining in post only faster.

They can implement dual gain output for stills (unless this 16 stops figure is meant to be for video only). As far as I understand, the readout will be slower in this case, and they'll have to use 16-bit depth in raw files.

Such a camera would almost eliminate the need for HDR, exposure blending etc.

Tbh I doubt the camera will actually have 16 stops of DR, first of all it's just a rumour at this stage...

 

[Ian K]

So improved battery life can be either be some sort of power saving within camera or yet another letter on the end of LP-E6NH. Given the caveat it isn't going to be a new battery. I would love for it to be chargeable within battery, like some third party ones. It would also help them with EU regulations, but so would adding a USB-C port to their existing charger.

Two of my LP-E6NH's have dropped to one red box on recharge performance. I'm holding out to find out what this does to the batteries.

 

[HotPixels]

Disagree. While I know some people love the Smart Controller, I hardly ever use mine on the R3; for me, the Eye Control AF is WAY faster and more accurate. I'd happily give up the Smart Controller for Eye Control.

Of course, I might be in the minority on this point. I absolutely love Eye Control.

EDIT: I should mention that I enjoy using the Smart Controller for quickly navigating through details on magnified image previews, whether in the viewfinder or on the camera's back screen

I agree wholeheartedly. The Eye Control on the R3 is fantastic. It needs to be on all higher end cameras now and eventually on all cameras. Once you use it you wish all cameras had it. It is a feature that feels very futuristic and one that even smartphones don't have.

 

[chik0240]

I wonder if the BG-R10 grip will be compatible with the Mark II Version, it looks like the physical body will not change.

highly likely not, if it's compatible they wouldn't discontinue it so quick