Canon Interview: EOS R1 is the true flagship
- Thread starter Richard CN
- Start date
I do believe Craig said that probably wasn't happening, and there's no way that would have been on the R1.
R1X - I saw the rumor. We have seen no other professional camera listed though in terms of certification, and I'm not sure Canon would within 2 months just decide to do another professional announcement. Also, people knew that an R1 was coming a year ago. While there were a bunch of "me too" rumors, most of them were pretty consistent with what an R1 would be.
that all being said, I can totally see them doing an R1s camera body - with 80-120 MP. I'm rather surprised they haven't already.
That all being said, I did ping Craig about this, so maybe he has something other than "it's complete garbage B.S." to add to it.
Upvote
0
Do yourself a favour and click on the link I just posted to learn the correlation of pixel size and imaging performance and once this sinks in you can easily avoid self-inflicted disappointments resulting from fantasy meeting reality.
You can toggle new R5CII for comparison with 2021 R3. This shows just one part, it affects a lot more, like highlight performance.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Would love to have a High Megapixel Version from Canon. Don´t need to be in a R1 body but a 60-80 MP Version would be great. Of course not with that high Frame rate like we have now.
Upvote
0
I'm not sure that's what Canon are saying.
I think they're saying that feature-wise, cameras lower down may jump your existing camera. Isn't the reason you buy the camera you do is based on the overall fit of the camera to your needs? So sure, an R6 MK III may get better features (some) than an R3 and an R5 MK II, but not necessarily *every* feature, and it still won't have some (45MP resolution or built-in grip). There will still be segmentation, but some features will definitely jump over existing models even if they're more expensive. The R5 II got better Eye-Focus than the R3, I suspect if the R6 III gets it, then it will be an improvement over the R5. They introduced the pre-capture function first I think with the M6 II, the 1DX series I don't think got it, nor the 5D. Happens all the time. They're certainly, I believe, not saying the R6 III will be better in *every* feature bar sensor resolution.
I also don't believe Canon is competing against its own models, I believe it needs to stay competitive in each segment. And introducing better features is more cost-effective than developing a new sensor each time. As the editorials here have said, and I agree, the R6 segment is the most competitive, so iterating that more frequently makes sense.
As for the R1 and 24MP, as reported many times on this site, like the 1DX, the target audience for Canon wants circa 24MP based on how many they can shoot (speed), how many they can fit on a card, how fast those files can transfer to the editors, and how well it handled high ISO, and its ability to take lots of abuse. Unless you're in that business, sure the R1 won't appeal. Back in the day, they had the 1D and the 1Ds for differing needs, but when the 1Dx came out they could provide the speed of the 1D with the resolution of the 1Ds. Except those values have moved on now. I guess based on their research the need for 45+MP in a Pro body with grip doesn't have a big enough market size, as we know the R1 market isn't big either. For those that want that resolution the R5 II is acceptable based on the lower price. You can't be all things to all people, especially in a significantly reduced camera market. I'm sure they got lots of stats/feedback from the days of the 5D IV at 30MP, the 5DS, and the 1Dx range to know their market.
Why there isn't an R5X or R5s, again my only guess would be not a big enough market to warrant it getting priority in sensor development etc over an R6 III, an R8 II, and an R7 II. The days of Canon filling niche audience requirements are diminishing with the shrinking of the overall market. And given the dip in their market share, they know whether a high-resolution camera will achieve that for them or not. I was lucky enough to have a 5Ds. Would I buy a high MP version instead of my R5? I think it really would have to be in the realms of 80+, especially as for a lot of people, using the latest AI upscaling software (even Canon's own) is sufficient. Therefore Canon is unlikely to address this requirement for another 5+ years when 80MP sensors are more common across its range and other manufacturers' sensors.
For stills photographers, it does seem that the feature-set is hitting a plateau, but given the suggestions here there is no reason why that needs to be the case. Most of the Japanese photo manufacturers (bar perhaps Nikon and Fuji recently) should spend time and effort developing better features in software, and perhaps even producing a subscription model where they regularly update the firmware with features. For whatever reason (I'm sure there are quite a few), Canon doesn't seem that interested, but nor do they open up the API to get to all the internal features for others to fill that gap.
I agree with Richard, that doing enhanced hw in a grip, with improved sw, would also help differentiate Canon. Imagine having the new AI features being processed even faster than in-camera because the AI chip in the grip is more powerful and has an additional battery as well. Knowing Canon however, they'd probably make certain features only available on the grip, which I'm not sure I would agree with - faster & more powerful in the grip vs in camera, sure.
I think they're saying that feature-wise, cameras lower down may jump your existing camera. Isn't the reason you buy the camera you do is based on the overall fit of the camera to your needs? So sure, an R6 MK III may get better features (some) than an R3 and an R5 MK II, but not necessarily *every* feature, and it still won't have some (45MP resolution or built-in grip). There will still be segmentation, but some features will definitely jump over existing models even if they're more expensive. The R5 II got better Eye-Focus than the R3, I suspect if the R6 III gets it, then it will be an improvement over the R5. They introduced the pre-capture function first I think with the M6 II, the 1DX series I don't think got it, nor the 5D. Happens all the time. They're certainly, I believe, not saying the R6 III will be better in *every* feature bar sensor resolution.
I also don't believe Canon is competing against its own models, I believe it needs to stay competitive in each segment. And introducing better features is more cost-effective than developing a new sensor each time. As the editorials here have said, and I agree, the R6 segment is the most competitive, so iterating that more frequently makes sense.
As for the R1 and 24MP, as reported many times on this site, like the 1DX, the target audience for Canon wants circa 24MP based on how many they can shoot (speed), how many they can fit on a card, how fast those files can transfer to the editors, and how well it handled high ISO, and its ability to take lots of abuse. Unless you're in that business, sure the R1 won't appeal. Back in the day, they had the 1D and the 1Ds for differing needs, but when the 1Dx came out they could provide the speed of the 1D with the resolution of the 1Ds. Except those values have moved on now. I guess based on their research the need for 45+MP in a Pro body with grip doesn't have a big enough market size, as we know the R1 market isn't big either. For those that want that resolution the R5 II is acceptable based on the lower price. You can't be all things to all people, especially in a significantly reduced camera market. I'm sure they got lots of stats/feedback from the days of the 5D IV at 30MP, the 5DS, and the 1Dx range to know their market.
Why there isn't an R5X or R5s, again my only guess would be not a big enough market to warrant it getting priority in sensor development etc over an R6 III, an R8 II, and an R7 II. The days of Canon filling niche audience requirements are diminishing with the shrinking of the overall market. And given the dip in their market share, they know whether a high-resolution camera will achieve that for them or not. I was lucky enough to have a 5Ds. Would I buy a high MP version instead of my R5? I think it really would have to be in the realms of 80+, especially as for a lot of people, using the latest AI upscaling software (even Canon's own) is sufficient. Therefore Canon is unlikely to address this requirement for another 5+ years when 80MP sensors are more common across its range and other manufacturers' sensors.
For stills photographers, it does seem that the feature-set is hitting a plateau, but given the suggestions here there is no reason why that needs to be the case. Most of the Japanese photo manufacturers (bar perhaps Nikon and Fuji recently) should spend time and effort developing better features in software, and perhaps even producing a subscription model where they regularly update the firmware with features. For whatever reason (I'm sure there are quite a few), Canon doesn't seem that interested, but nor do they open up the API to get to all the internal features for others to fill that gap.
I agree with Richard, that doing enhanced hw in a grip, with improved sw, would also help differentiate Canon. Imagine having the new AI features being processed even faster than in-camera because the AI chip in the grip is more powerful and has an additional battery as well. Knowing Canon however, they'd probably make certain features only available on the grip, which I'm not sure I would agree with - faster & more powerful in the grip vs in camera, sure.
Upvote
0
The R5 already had that with the ethernet grip: if you wanted to have FTP, you needed the grip. That’s purely a software feature, unlocked by a €€€€€ grip.
The reverse is also true, a number of nifty feature only works over wifi, not over ethernet. I would very much like for the firmware team to discover that networking is the same, regardless of carrier and unify the features.
Upvote
0
I am intrigued and googled it but did not find the info can you give me a hint on what Flash+ES is?Ignoring the amount of megapixels, the R6II already outshines the R5 in a lot of ways. Much improved AF, 10% less rolling shutter, 40fps, better anti-flicker and oversampled 4k60 video and no half hour video limits.
So the R6III being ‘better’ than the R5II isn’t
such a stretch. The big question I have, what will the R8II be like? The R6 line doesn’t interest me, it’s too big to act as a travel body next to R5 series body, the R8 is a near perfect blend of size, capability and price. At least for me
I must admit that I’m not planning to replace the R8 with an R8II, apart from ES+flash, I’m hard pressed to think of something that the R8 lacks that would make me upgrade to the II instead of the III or IV.
Flash+ES turned out to be something I really wanted, otherwise I would’ve skipped the R5II as well.
Upvote
0
Using a flash in electronic shutter mode, only the stacked sensor cameras allow that.
Upvote
0
Is it, though? It fails on almost every spec compared to the A1 and Z9, which are old cameras now.
If you compare it to an iPhone, it's like Canon is selling an iPhone 12 for the same price as an iPhone 15.
Many forget that while Canon may win in some areas today, it loses in others. The A1 II might not be far off, and depending on what Sony does, the R1 could feel even more outdated. Nikon might also release a Z9 II in about a year, while the R1 will have to hold up for 4 years. I think it’s going to be a hard time for Canon to convince new photographers to choose them.
That said, I agree that the 5D Mark II was a better release in its competitive landscape than the R1.
Time will tell, but I don’t think the future looks particularly bright for Canon.
text.
Upvote
0
Not only stacked , global shutter also but that’s something canon will release 2028.
Upvote
0
I'm more likely to buy a pair of R6iii's than I am a single R3 or R1. As mush as i appreciate them as beautiful pieces of engineering, I've always prefered the smaller and lighter 5x/6x series cameras. 24mp is perfect for me, although it would be nice to have a 45mp option.
Upvote
0
Can you list them?
Making a small table because I am bored
| Spec | R5ii | a1 | Z9 |
| Max fps raw | 30 (14 bit) lossless compressed | 20 (13 bit) lossless compressed 30 (13 bit) lossy compressed | 20 (14 bit) lossless compressed |
| EVF | 5.76M dots 0.76x @120 fps | 9.44M dots 0.9x @60 fps (resolution decreases to 5.76M dots while focusing or shooting) 5.76M dots 0.9x @120 fps 5.76M dots 0.76x @240 fps | 3.69 M dots 0.8x @120 fps |
| LCD | 3.2" 2.1M dot Fully-articulated | 3.0" 1.44M dot Tilting | 3.2" 2.1M dot Two way tilting |
| Resolution | 45 MP | 50 MP | 45 MP |
| Video specs | Up to 8K60 with limitations | Up to 8K30 | Up to 8K60 |
| Internal Raw video? | Yes | No | Yes |
| Max ES flash sync (linked to RS) | 1/160 standard 1/200 in boost mode with compatible flashes only | 1/200 | 1/200 |
| Price (today at B&H) | $4,299.00 | $6,498.00 | $5,496.95 |
And then there is AF, that from reviews the R5ii took a considerable step above the others.
And then you also have the Eye control AF, not found in any of the other brands.
Last edited:
LOL. So there was a R1 rumor, and you were excited about it but turned out to be incorrect so now you’re disappointed. But now there’s an R1X rumor and you’re excited about it. Rinse and repeat. Might be better to stick to press releases and avoid rumor sites…
Upvote
0
on what planet?
R5 Mark II offers the same electronic, faster mechanical shutter, less compromised electronic shutter (only some lenses), 8k60, RAW video, larger LCD, more video features (waveforms, false color) - and is $2200 less than the A1. The 5MP difference is nothing. The only spec that is definitely in the A1's favor is the EVF.
The Z9 is a professional camera worthy of the Nikon name. But the A1? Please. We won't even get into the AF when the A1 and original R5 was basically in a dead heat.
Upvote
0
Regarding the sensor, I think either we are about to have a beautiful sensor optimized for very low noise and high quality in the R1 or they did not touch on the true reason for a 24 MP sensor. In terms of moving bits around, the R1 is about the same as the original R5 and ~40% less than the R5 II. This is not a bandwidth issue. There is nothing to balance there. But, if you want to tell me that moving bits in a similar system at a faster rate adds noise...well...of course it does. So, I am hopeful that the 24 MP sensor is actually about having very clean images. The R5 is already stellar but I can see wanting a flagship produce the best, cleanest lowest noise images.
Upvote
0
Perhaps I missed seeing it since I haven't had enough coffee yet today and I'm sure if I did that it will be corrected but...
While he explicitly says that the R1 was never meant to be the R3 Mark II he fairly carefully avoids discussing whether the R3 was intended to be the R1 and was changed in positioning and name to R3 toward the end of 2020 when their industry intelligence saw what Sony and Nikon were about to release in the same 2021 product cycle as Canon's intended mirrorless flagship. Nothing he says wouldn't equally apply if that was what happened.
He also doesn't actually say what differentiates the R3 and R1 segments now that both exist or why the R3 continues to exist besides a vague statement that some people will prefer the R3.
So, one bit of industry gossip explicitly denied, one carefully not contradicted.
While he explicitly says that the R1 was never meant to be the R3 Mark II he fairly carefully avoids discussing whether the R3 was intended to be the R1 and was changed in positioning and name to R3 toward the end of 2020 when their industry intelligence saw what Sony and Nikon were about to release in the same 2021 product cycle as Canon's intended mirrorless flagship. Nothing he says wouldn't equally apply if that was what happened.
He also doesn't actually say what differentiates the R3 and R1 segments now that both exist or why the R3 continues to exist besides a vague statement that some people will prefer the R3.
So, one bit of industry gossip explicitly denied, one carefully not contradicted.
Upvote
0
I am in the same boat about sharing files, I find it should be a priority to be able to send a file with a touch of a button to your smartphone.
And the future I would also love to make the rear screen of the camera as big as it can fit, it would be great for videos and reviewing.
And the future I would also love to make the rear screen of the camera as big as it can fit, it would be great for videos and reviewing.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 383640
Guest
The specified resolution of the EVF of the A1 is a pure fraud - this resolution is only present in the playback of photos, and during continuous focusing it drops by at least half, if not more.
That's the case with a lot of Sony specs.
Upvote
0
Seeing that the R5 Mark II and the Alpha 1 are small form factor bodies with no vertical grip and the Z 8 is the small form factor with no vertical grip version of the Z 9 with the same specs as the Z 9 for the specs you have quoted, a better comparison would be Z 8 for that last column. Only one entry changes and that's price at $3,796.95 (using the same current B&H pricing) so it is an easy change to make.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
