Canon: No Plans for High Resolution R1
- Thread starter Richard CN
- Start date
Actually I was the same. The size always put me off 1 series cameras. But the speed and low light performance is what tipped me into buying the R1. I had never considered a larger style body before as that wasn’t for me. In reality, it is so much more comfortable to shoot with, doesn’t feel very different weight wise (although coming from 5div).As much as I like to pretend that the R3/R1 formfactor is not for me, the price is the real gating factor in my case. The R5 is as large a camera that I can tolerate, which is the deciding factor, but if it wasn't, the price would prevent me from getting it
It’s a factor I would thought I would need to get used to or get over, but in fact it’s turned out to be a massive benefit.
Upvote
0
T
I’d guess the R6 outsells the R5 many times over simply because of price.
Upvote
0
Complete hobbyist here, so the ratio between camera and snacks in my bag is a big deciding factor, especially when the kids come along.
Upvote
0
Exactly my point. MP are only a secondary consideration for many people. So the previous post I was replying to insinuating that the R5 outsells the R1 and R3 due to MP count isn’t necessarily a tangible metric when the bodies are many thousands cheaper.
Upvote
0
Earlier today, I had some guy refusing my services when he found out the equipment I use. He told me that his Samsung phone had 4 x the mp count as my camera, and that he wasn’t going to pay my ‘exorbitant’ prices for using a ‘worse’ camera.
Upvote
0
Depending on the specific model phone, he'd refuse someone with a Hasselblad X*D or Fuji GFX as well!
Upvote
0
It’s the converse for me. I used my T1i/500D, 7D and 5DII with a battery grip. When I got the 1D X, I found it far more comfortable to hold than the accessory-gripped bodies.As much as I like to pretend that the R3/R1 formfactor is not for me, the price is the real gating factor in my case. The R5 is as large a camera that I can tolerate, which is the deciding factor, but if it wasn't, the price would prevent me from getting it
I’m prefer a smaller body for travel (the R8 is great for that), in that setting my camera is carried in a bag most of the time and frequently on a tripod. For everyday shooting, the camera is in my hand the whole time and if I use a smaller body like that, my hand hurts afterwards.
24 MP is sufficient for my needs, I have the focal lengths needed to get my desired framing, even for distant subjects. I’m not opposed to having more MP, I just don’t need them.
I’m fortunate that cost is not an issue, for me. It’s the ergonomics, not the economics, that drive the choice. I bought an EOS R in 2019, but the 1D X remained my primary camera until the R3 came out (I used the R only for travel).
Upvote
0
josephandrews222
I Shot the Sheriff, but I Did Not Shoot the Deputy
From the article:
"If you want a camera to excel at autofocus, calculations, and delivering the highest level of performance, that makes you balance resolution against the raw performance of the camera. You can’t have both simultaneously – at least for Canon."
I like this.
Which sort of begs the question: if Canon could, right now, build and sell a higher-resolution R-whatever, with exactly the same features, specifications and reliability as today's R1, don't you think they would do that?
I do. And they'd sell a boat-load of them.
"If you want a camera to excel at autofocus, calculations, and delivering the highest level of performance, that makes you balance resolution against the raw performance of the camera. You can’t have both simultaneously – at least for Canon."
I like this.
Which sort of begs the question: if Canon could, right now, build and sell a higher-resolution R-whatever, with exactly the same features, specifications and reliability as today's R1, don't you think they would do that?
I do. And they'd sell a boat-load of them.
Upvote
0
Evidently you think so. It seems like a very reasonable inference they could have done it with a 45 MP camera that shoots 30 fps (as the R5II does) instead of 40 fps but is otherwise basically the same as the R1. But they didn't do that.
The difference is that while it's your opinion that Canon would sell a boat-load of such cameras, Canon has actual data on the buying patterns and demographics of their customer base to inform their product development decisions.
Upvote
0
Yep
Well yeah - if they could make the r1 as it is now or better with more mp, then yeah. They seemingly can’t though. Which is the point I think. If more mp can come to the r series at some point without losing the speed and everything else then obviously that’s great. But whacking more mp to make it sound better but is actually worse at what is designed to be seems to be what people are clamouring for. Which is what I, for example, would never want to see.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 380853
Guest
I tried sony twice back when it was the first 60Mp?, an A7r 3 or 4 ? . Awful is accurate. I had it alongside the 5DsR and shot a couple jobs on both to compare the whole workflow.
The Fuji gfx is no better but I only use it for the work that warrants the 100Mp and angle of view with shift lenses, otherwise it's equally bad or worse actually.
Upvote
0
Right? I mean I have done long ish shoots with several Sony bodies, not only is the normal wrist ache somehow worse, they manage to make the fingers ache too. My shoulder and back ache from some kind of transferred pain was at the very least thrice as bad as it is with a 5div, and that’s already pretty hardcore after a big shoot. That’s not even mentioning the ridiculous menu and button organisation - although I admit that’s probably me being so used to shooting canon for years.
Upvote
0
Nice to see people put their money where their need is. People complain that 24 or 45 MP aren’t enough but somehow 60 MP is perfect. IMO, if 24 or 45 don’t cut it for you, then you should be using at least the 100 MP GFX if not the 150 MP Phase One.
If I required high MP, I’d do what you’re doing and add the Fuji MF. They even have a 500mm GF lens that gets you to 550mm FFeq with the TC, though I’m not convinced the AF would do nearly as well as Canon for flying birds.
In your case, perhaps you’re on a tripod for shift lenses anyway (but maybe not). That’s my typical use case for the R8 and my TS-E lenses, so the small body is fine.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 380853
Guest
And for my uses, I only bought it for 99% tripod work so the hand ergonomics weren't even the deciding factor, it was all the rest of it which I just didn't like at all.
Maybe I was both spoiled by the ease of using canon and the feel of the full size bodies. I probably only used the 5DsR 20% of the time in hand because I also usually had some 1D series at the same time with the last ones being the 1Dx2 and 3. I almost kept the last 1Dx3 I had "just to have a dslr" around but the 5DsR is my back-up to the back-up.
Upvote
0
Some reviews of the A9 III (the global shutter one) last year praised it for finally improving the ergonomics and making it more human. I have no experience with it though.
The R5 is really ergonomic and I love it.
I don't think Canon's menus are great either. Aside from being fairly consistent over the years, some things are illogically placed, some are annoying (You can't do X when Y is set somewhere totally different) and the mislabeled "Enable"/"Enabled" options are comical.
Not to mention some setting values are per-mode while others are global, but they don't tell you which is which (only in the manual). And the menus themselves change based on photo/video, what lens is attached, etc. but again with no way to tell what's missing or why. Then there are weird limitations like length when entering filenames or prefixes, straight from the 80s.
Button customization options are whack too, some things just aren't possible for (seemingly) no reason or don't work, I made a thread recently with an example (checkered flag button). Some are also buggy or laggy (AF using recall), although that is not a fault of the menu system.
I'd like an overhaul please. Even in 1987 when EOS was introduced better UIs existed. Of course many long-time users likely disagree, especially if they rely on muscle memory for work.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
