I think your example is too extreme. My R7 crops a 400mm lens to the "equivalent" of a 640mm FF lens, a crop factor of 1.6X. Your example is a crop factor of 3. The MFT crop is only 2.
Upvote
0
Canon USA: The R3 line will continue
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
But there was the 1Ds, 1DsII etc, which were "merged" into the 1-series, leaving the 5-series as the higher MP FF option. The market could have changed since then, but they must think it hasn't (until and unless they do bring out a substantially higher res body).
Upvote
0
With 8k recording it is much easier to hold an erratically moving subject in frame then stabilize and crop in post down to 4k, of course you'll have to plan for that and use a lens of appropriate focal length so there is always a buffer of pixels around the subject.
Upvote
0
I don't understand why Canon acts like the only pro market is sports and journalism. It's like landscape, architecture, portrait, product or studio photography are somehow less pro, so they don't deserve a pro body.
All this endless talk about how THE PRO'S need 24 mpix and they need 487 fps and they need AI to focus on action that hasn't even happened yet and blah blah blah... So much is being catered to this one segment of the market, their wants and needs are absolute priority. Everybody else? Sorry, apparently you're not pro!
Yet I personally know several sports / journalism shooters and they're using 1DX or even older cameras, their agencies haven't invested in gear in ages and will probably not invest for a while. At the same time I know MANY MANY MANY landscape, product, wedding and studio photographers who are constantly investing in new gear and they invest mainly for two reasons: they make more than enough money to be able to do so and they need to keep up with competition.
Most of the sports shooters I see are rocking their old EF 400 f2.8. Some may have a second prosumer body with a 70-200 or maybe 24-70 on it, but that's it. If their agencies get them a new R1 body, they won't be investing into anything else. They'll adapt the old EF lenses and it will be many, many years before they upgrade to some newer body.
I am friends with some world-known war photographers that work either freelance or for Reuters or AP. They're not hauling big camera bodies into combat zones. Most of them are shooting some small Sony or Fuji or even Leica cameras, with tiny lenses. They need to move fast and don't want their cameras to be mistaken for RPGs. I do understand Canon probably wasn't happy that both Reuters and AP have signed deals and switched over completely to Sony, both for video and for stills, but this insane catering to just one style of photography is getting annoying.
All this endless talk about how THE PRO'S need 24 mpix and they need 487 fps and they need AI to focus on action that hasn't even happened yet and blah blah blah... So much is being catered to this one segment of the market, their wants and needs are absolute priority. Everybody else? Sorry, apparently you're not pro!
Yet I personally know several sports / journalism shooters and they're using 1DX or even older cameras, their agencies haven't invested in gear in ages and will probably not invest for a while. At the same time I know MANY MANY MANY landscape, product, wedding and studio photographers who are constantly investing in new gear and they invest mainly for two reasons: they make more than enough money to be able to do so and they need to keep up with competition.
Most of the sports shooters I see are rocking their old EF 400 f2.8. Some may have a second prosumer body with a 70-200 or maybe 24-70 on it, but that's it. If their agencies get them a new R1 body, they won't be investing into anything else. They'll adapt the old EF lenses and it will be many, many years before they upgrade to some newer body.
I am friends with some world-known war photographers that work either freelance or for Reuters or AP. They're not hauling big camera bodies into combat zones. Most of them are shooting some small Sony or Fuji or even Leica cameras, with tiny lenses. They need to move fast and don't want their cameras to be mistaken for RPGs. I do understand Canon probably wasn't happy that both Reuters and AP have signed deals and switched over completely to Sony, both for video and for stills, but this insane catering to just one style of photography is getting annoying.
Upvote
0
the R5 has the same or better weather sealing and construction than the early EOS-1V and also I think around the same as the early 1Ds - how much pro did you want?
the 5D and the R5 conversely have been for many many MANY years - the landscape/wedding/etc camera of choice of professionals.
ie: I used the 5D, and it was fantastically balanced with a speedlight and 24-70mm F2.8.
Upvote
0
For landscapes and architecture the 45 MP R5 Mk2 or R5 is an excellent choice. More than enough resolution and very portable.
For portrait, the 24 MP R1 is likely sufficient resolution. Are you making large portrait for clients?
For product and studio work, either R5 Mk2, R5 or R1 could suffice depending on print size produced. Of course, this all comes down to print size. If you are producing very large prints, I would recommend a digital medium format camera with 100 MP sensor for product and studio work.
Upvote
0
It has the same weather sealing as a camera that came out 22 years ago... and that's somehow suppose to prove Canon is taking care of that market segment?
I have shoots in deserts, mountains, swamps, snow, rain, low temps and extreme temps etc. Yet somehow I should be ok with a prosumer body, while the guy shooting baseball or press conferences get's the real deal. Why?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I am making large prints. Very large. I also work with various advertising agencies and 45 mpix is just barely cutting it. Also, 45 mpix isn't that much for landscape or architecture, but that market segment is probably more interested in 16 bit color.
Imagine if pro sports shooters were told "go buy Sony A9III if you need a high speed camera, Canon doesn't have anything for you"... there'd be rioting in the streets and shock and indignation online: "HOW DARE THEY NOT TAKE CARE OF SPORT PHOTOGRAPHERS!? DON'T THEY KNOW WE MATTER THE MOST?!"
Instead, Canon now offers two pro bodies, both catering to the exact same market niche and zero pro bodies for anyone else.
Upvote
0
To clarify: when you say 'pro body', do you mean a gripped body (R1/R3, not R5) or a body that has the best construction from that manufacturer (R1, not R3/R5)? Or both?
I'm a hobbyist, so I have no idea what people that use the camera for a living want or need. Personally, I don't like grips, they prevent me from getting a low angle. And example from this morning, the lens hood was touching the water and the tripod plate on the body was 1 cm above the water:
A gripped body would've needed to get submerged, the R1 might handle that, not excited to find out the hard way
I've tried it with the body upside down, but that makes it too awkward for me.Also, the flocked interior for the lens hoods seems like a good idea, till you get it wet.
Upvote
0
I'm talking about both. A gripped body, best construction, best weather sealing etc.To clarify: when you say 'pro body', do you mean a gripped body (R1/R3, not R5) or a body that has the best construction from that manufacturer (R1, not R3/R5)? Or both?
I'm a hobbyist, so I have no idea what people that use the camera for a living want or need. Personally, I don't like grips, they prevent me from getting a low angle. And example from this morning, the lens hood was touching the water and the tripod plate on the body was 1 cm above the water:
View attachment 218539
A gripped body would've needed to get submerged, the R1 might handle that, not excited to find out the hard way
Also, the flocked interior for the lens hoods seems like a good idea, till you get it wet.
Are there situations where a gripped body is not ideal - yes, as your example illustrates. However, cases where you're shooting low angle, just a sliver above water are not that common.
I've resorted to inverting the tripod center pole to get some shots, but that happens maybe once on twice yearly for me. Rain, dust, heat, sand and various bumps, wear and tear - those happen daily.
Anyway, to get back on point, I'm just puzzled by sports and journalist photographers being treated like some imaging royalty by Canon, who seems to be set on prioritizing needs of a niche market segment.
Upvote
0
I think someone very senior in Canon is pushing the journo agenda, the beancounters think that is profitable enough to allow.
We can wave marketshare data around all day long, but we can’t definitively say that Canon is sailing the best course, we can only say that, so far, it has been a good course.
Upvote
0
The same could be said of some other Japanese camera companies….. Sony Nikon Panasonic Fuji OM
Upvote
0
This was my prediction that the R1 would have 45mp but down sample (2x2) on the fly to a lower resolution at high frame rates. Craw handkes this mostly for file size but down sampling should give better detail at the smaller resolution.
Best of both worlds but yet to occur.
Upvote
0
45mp on the R5 is great for Astro
Make sure you use a tracker of course.
16 bit would be sweet.
Stitching many panels of high resolution shots does mean some big files to edit though
Upvote
0
That is about the only reason I can see for 8K. I used my R7 to take some oversampled 4K footage of a tortoise feeding. (Fast movement was not a problem.) This was actually a test of the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 DC DN Contemporary. I then looked at it on a 43" 4K television viewing at about 3 feet. The clarity was just stunning.
Upvote
0
Yes absolutely. This way of thinking seems to be very deeply rooted in Japanese culture, so I don´t expect any company to be vastly different in that regard.The same could be said of some other Japanese camera companies….. Sony Nikon Panasonic Fuji OM
Upvote
0
Similar threads
