Canon USA: The R3 line will continue

[CJaurelius]

Usually, people who buy "the best" when it is neither necessary or maybe even optimum typically have a problem with self-esteem and feel that the perceived quality of the trinkets they buy will will somehow enhance the public perception of their phallic dimensions. I always found it amusing that if you walk into a Porsche dealer without being dressed to the nines, the sales folk will ignore you and try to shoo you out of the store. In contrast, you can go into a Ferrari dealer dressed in old jeans and get immediate attention. The difference being that the typical Porsche customer is trying to reach beyond his means and feels the need to display wealth, whereas the typical Ferrari customer can fully afford to dress any damn way he pleases. I suspect the same would be true for buying (or leasing) a phase one camera body. You just wouldn't be there if you couldn't afford it.

The problem with this analogy is these people are buying these vehichles for their own personal consumption. If young kids in jeans were making $200 - $300k a year doing YouTube videos about driving Porsche's I'm pretty sure the dealers would pay them more attention.

Sony, Leica, Hasselblad, more like Porsche. Canon, OTOH is the Toyota of the camera business. They will sell you a Lexus ( R1) if you want it, but the majority of their business is mainstream with good functionality and reliability. You do have to pay attention, though because every now and then, they will pop up with a Supra or Corolla GR.

The peoblem here is this is the part of the business that is going away. Not many people are want a Toyota Corolla when they all have Honda Civis (smartphones) already.

In your analogy it would be like Totota making the Corolla and the Lexus. But because they are focusing on having the image of being the depandable reliable basic car most of the younger generation grows to associate Lexus' with cheaper cars. In the future if people stop driving cars and the only people who purchase cars are either sports car drivers or sports car enthusiast Toyota would be be at a disadvantage.

 

[OldDudePhotog]

I’m not claiming my opinion is any more valid than yours. I get that a 24 MP R1 doesn’t make sense to you. It clearly made sense to Canon. They get to make that choice, not us.

The point I’m making (repeatedly) is that Canon is far more likely to know what their target market wants/needs than you, me, or anyone on this forum. Of course you know what you want. Are you claiming you know what the majority of R1 buyers would want? I hope not, but you would be far from the first to claim that and look foolish.

I think it would be interesting to see the results of a poll of which R1 people would rather have, 24mp or one with a higher resolution. Only problem is getting the poll in front of a reasonable sample size and getting people to actually vote.

 

[CJaurelius]

Great example. Certainly representative of the camera market as a whole.

I can list you hundered if not thousands of YouTubers that purchase tens of thousands of dollars of camear grear every single year. This is probably the largest segment of the business today.

You should share this critical information with Canon to save them from themselves.

You do realize that Canon gives every single camera they've made over to Manny to try? He has a video up right now WITH the R5mii praising it. Canon is clearly aware of what I'm saying and is trying to address it. They are clearly moving in the direction of video as I'm suggesting.

I think the problem is that they have the added challenge of trying to 1) balance the desires of the younger people with with their older customer base and 2) its harder for them to invest in sensor R&D as much when they aren't as large and were spread out over more products and mounts. I think ending the M line was an acknowledgement of that. While they were popular cameras they needed to focus on the RF mount if these were going to keep it competitive.

 

[CJaurelius]

Yes, but the point is that if one is going to lambaste Canon for a ‘12+ year old resolution’ as @OldDudePhotog is doing, one should even more harshly lambaste Sony for a nearly 20-year old resolution.

Or, one could acknowledge that different market segments have different needs as far as resolution is concerned, and that the higher/highest resolutions are not preferred by everyone.

But that is what other people are saying. No one is mad that the R1 is 24MP. What people are confused about is that they didn't make another camera as an OPTION.

With Sony if you want a 12MP sensor that is good for video in low light you can get that. If you want a 61MP sensor and don't care about a fast sensor readout speed you can get that. If you want a middle of the road sensor with 33MP you can get that. If you want a 50MP with the fastest readout speed but want to spend an arm and a leg you can get that. If you want 24MP global shutter that gives you 120 fps but sacrafices on DR you can get that.

No one is upset that they made a 24MP camera for sports shooters. The issue is that they haven't yet made a high megapixel camera with a fast readout speed. They could've charged $10k for the thing and people would've been like OK now we know they can make something up there with the A1/Z9.

 

[frankchn]

Sony, Leica, Hasselblad, more like Porsche. Canon, OTOH is the Toyota of the camera business. They will sell you a Lexus ( R1) if you want it, but the majority of their business is mainstream with good functionality and reliability. You do have to pay attention, though because every now and then, they will pop up with a Supra or Corolla GR.

I don't think Sony has anywhere near the brand cachet of Leica or even Hasselblad. They are a mainstream brand in the same way Canon and Nikon are. I own a Sony TV and a PlayStation, and I don't own the Leica Cine1 120" laser projector

In any case, if there are a bunch of wealthy amateurs willing to spend a ton of money on "the best" camera, I think it would be silly to ignore that market, even if they are only buying those cameras for "phallic reasons". Money is money after all.

 

[CJaurelius]

Yes, he is a S*ny shooter here to spread disinformation.

Not sure how people's opinion is disinformation. We talking about cameras not political policies that affect our lives. You are taking this a bit too serious.

To me right now the best pound for pound camera is the R5mii. You're getting 90% of the A1 for less than 70% of the price. Is that disinformation as well?

 

[CJaurelius]

I don't think Sony has anywhere near the brand cachet of Leica or even Hasselblad. They are a mainstream brand in the same way Canon and Nikon are. I own a Sony TV and a PlayStation, and I don't own the Leica Cine1 120" laser projector

To be fair these companies have a range of products that overlap. Sony has TV's that cost more than that projector. Again Manny Ortiz has the Sony A1 $6500 and the Hasselblad Z2D $8,200.

In any case, if there are a bunch of wealthy amateurs willing to spend a ton of money on "the best" camera, I think it would be silly to ignore that market, even if they are only buying those cameras for "phallic reasons". Money is money after all.

I don't think these people are wealthy. If you run a YouTube channel that makes you $100k a year that affords you the ability to purchase expensive camera gear but I wouldn't consider that wealthy.

 

[frankchn]

I don't think these people are wealthy. If you run a YouTube channel that makes you $100k a year that affords you the ability to purchase expensive camera gear but I wouldn't consider that wealthy.

Even beyond the YouTubers (I have no idea how many YTers are there that actually go through lots of camera gear that they bought with their own earnings instead of loaned to them as evaluation units), I am thinking about your stereotypical dentist or doctor buying the best Tour de France-grade time-trial bicycles, etc...

 

[OldDudePhotog]

Not sure how people's opinion is disinformation. We talking about cameras not political policies that affect our lives. You are taking this a bit too serious.

To me right now the best pound for pound camera is the R5mii. You're getting 90% of the A1 for less than 70% of the price. Is that disinformation as well?

I have both the r5m2 and R1 on preorder, if the r5m2 works well for my professional needs, I will cancel the R1 and wait for a later model with higher resolution.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I think it would be interesting to see the results of a poll of which R1 people would rather have, 24mp or one with a higher resolution. Only problem is getting the poll in front of a reasonable sample size and getting people to actually vote.

That sounds suspiciously like market research. It seems very likely that Canon engaged in market research when they were designing the R1, don’t you think? It’s the sort of thing that companies tend to do when designing products.

So, which sounds most likely to you?

1. Canon didn’t conduct any market research when designing the R1.
2. Canon conducted market research when designing the R1, but did not consider MP count as part of that research.
3. Canon conducted market research when designing the R1, customer feedback indicated most buyers wanted more than 24 MP, but Canon ignored that and designed a 24 MP R1 anyway.
4. Canon conducted market research when designing the R1, customer feedback indicated most buyers would be ok with 24 MP.

It’s funny when people suggest that Canon doesn’t understand or care about what their customers want or need. I guess some people just can’t grasp that their own wants/needs/opinions aren’t universal.

 

[neuroanatomist]

No one is mad that the R1 is 24MP.

Lol. Read this forum, sometime.

No one is upset that they made a 24MP camera for sports shooters. The issue is that they haven't yet made a high megapixel camera with a fast readout speed.

The real issue is that some people can’t handle the fact that Canon isn’t catering to their personal want/need. It really is that simple.

People don’t say it like that only because, at least on some level, they realize how foolish and petulant it would make them appear.

 

[frankchn]

So, which sounds most likely to you?

1. Canon didn’t conduct any market research when designing the R1.
2. Canon conducted market research when designing the R1, but did not consider MP count as part of that research.
3. Canon conducted market research when designing the R1, customer feedback indicated most buyers wanted more than 24 MP, but Canon ignored that and designed a 24 MP R1 anyway.
4. Canon conducted market research when designing the R1, customer feedback indicated most buyers would be ok with 24 MP.

It’s funny when people suggest that Canon doesn’t understand or care about what their customers want or need. I guess some people just can’t grasp that their own wants/needs/opinions aren’t universal.

Or there is another possibility: Canon conducted market research indicating that customers wanted both high MP and high fps but preferred high fps over high MP if push comes to shove. Jeff Cable definitely has this preference of having a high fps camera and but also wanting a bit more MP (he mentioned anything from 30 to 50 MP) to work with in his blog posts.

For whatever reason, Canon couldn't get a high MP + high fps sensor to work out, so decided to drop the high MP requirement.

 

[CJaurelius]

Even beyond the YouTubers (I have no idea how many YTers are there that actually go through lots of camera gear that they bought with their own earnings instead of loaned to them as evaluation units), I am thinking about your stereotypical dentist or doctor buying the best Tour de France-grade time-trial bicycles, etc...

Those people have always been part of the market and always will be but I doubt they are a meaningful portion of it.

In terms of YouTubers were talking about an insane number. There are over 110 MILLION YouTube channels. You only need 1% of them to use some sort of decent camera gear and you talking over 1M people.

In terms of them getting them evaluation units that's a moot point. For the people to get big enough for companies to send them gear they would've already have had to have access to tons of gear in the first place. Going back to Manny sure he gets to test out the R5mii and the R1 for a couple of weeks. But he can only really shoot a few videos about the gear as he has to send it back. If he wants to make more content with the camera in the future he has to go out and buy which is why he bought the original R5.

 

[CJaurelius]

Lol. Read this forum, sometime.

I do and what I see is overly sensitive people who can't take criticism well. It's clear that people who are complaining could care less which number Canon called their high megapixel flagship. R1X, R3mii, R0 RFreakingFlaghsip. It's not the name its the fact that it doesn't exist.

The real issue is that some people can’t handle the fact that Canon isn’t catering to their personal want/need. It really is that simple.

I agree. When people in the market don't get what they want they complain. We just disagree on the sigficance of that market.

People don’t say it like that only because, at least on some level, they realize how foolish and petulant it would make them appear.

No they are pretty clear. Only people who care too much about this pretend to morally superior. Were talking about cameras.

 

[frankchn]

In terms of YouTubers were talking about an insane number. There are over 110 MILLION YouTube channels. You only need 1% of them to use some sort of decent camera gear and you talking over 1M people.

Maybe, but I feel like the number of channels who are going to buy R1/A1/Z9 level cameras are probably in the thousands (at most) -- these are all photography focused cameras at the end of the day.

There is no point in buying a photography-focused camera to produce videos. If YouTubers are buying these cameras, for the most part they are going to be photography-focused channels where they are going to be talking about the gear.

For video production, I suspect most channels will start out with an iPhone, and then graduate to a ZV-E10, R50, or similar, and move on up to C70s/FX3s/etc... instead.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Or there is another possibility: Canon conducted market research indicating that customers wanted both high MP and high fps but preferred high fps over high MP if push comes to shove. Jeff Cable definitely has this preference of having a high fps camera and but also wanting a bit more MP (he mentioned anything from 30 to 50 MP) to work with in his blog posts.

That’s certainly possible. If so, it still means Canon is responding to customer needs. Jeff Cable is not the whole market.

For whatever reason, Canon couldn't get a high MP + high fps sensor to work out, so decided to drop the high MP requirement.

The R5II has 87.5% more MP and 25% lower fps. With the R1, Canon approximately doubled the readout speed compared to the R3 (and added 10 fps). What makes you think they couldn’t get it to work out?

Fits well with the narrative, though. “Everyone wants what I want, but Canon doesn’t understand what people want.” “Canon tried to give us what we all know the majority wants, but they just couldn’t manage it for technical reasons.”

Somehow, the narrative never concludes that Canon understands the needs of their buyers better than the narrator, even though that is, by far, the most likely circumstance.

 

[OldDudePhotog]

That sounds suspiciously like market research. It seems very likely that Canon engaged in market research when they were designing the R1, don’t you think? It’s the sort of thing that companies tend to do when designing products.

So, which sounds most likely to you?

1. Canon didn’t conduct any market research when designing the R1.
2. Canon conducted market research when designing the R1, but did not consider MP count as part of that research.
3. Canon conducted market research when designing the R1, customer feedback indicated most buyers wanted more than 24 MP, but Canon ignored that and designed a 24 MP R1 anyway.
4. Canon conducted market research when designing the R1, customer feedback indicated most buyers would be ok with 24 MP.

It’s funny when people suggest that Canon doesn’t understand or care about what their customers want or need. I guess some people just can’t grasp that their own wants/needs/opinions aren’t universal.

If I had a nickel for every time a company just put out a product without considering all of the options, I might have a decent chunk of change. My suspicion is Canon went to their "pros" and listened to them but did not consider a larger market that could/would buy this camera if it had higher resolution because it is "the way they have always done it", another term that I have heard so many times as a justification it sickens me. The poll I was speaking of would preferably sample a broad range from your prosumers to your professionals, I would exclude your hobbyists as they probably would/could not buy the camera regardless of its specs. I think it would be interesting to see the results. It would put a lot of the discussion to bed. The most likely reason Canon did this would be to have the large gap between the 1 and 5m2 to protect the sales of both units. I am also reading the comments here on these forums and it seems as if more people wanted a higher resolution than those who did not, but that is hardly scientific.

Honestly I am really hoping the 5m2 really knocks my socks off and I wind up just using that as my primary camera and my R3 becomes the backup. My only concern is the buffer size of the 5m2 being too small for large groups of athletes coming by or a large group of motorcycles doing the same.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It's clear that people who are complaining could care less which number Canon called their high megapixel flagship. R1X, R3mii, R0 RFreakingFlaghsip. It's not the name its the fact that it doesn't exist.

The R1 exists. Canon says it’s the flagship. Some people aren’t happy with that. Awwwwww.

 

[frankchn]

The R5II has 87.5% more MP and 25% lower fps. With the R1, Canon approximately doubled the readout speed compared to the R3 (and added 10 fps). What makes you think they couldn’t get it to work out?

It might not be a pure fps issue -- the R3 can read out 195 fps for 50 frames in the special mode after all, but some other issue with sensor readout speed.

The R5 Mark II has a readout speed of ~5-6 ms (as evidenced by the ES X-Sync limitation of 1/160th). The R1 has a readout speed of ~2-2.5ms (as evidenced by the ES X-Sync limitation of 1/400th). So at a glance, for the same generation of sensors, halving the MP count seems to give you slightly more than doubling of the readout speed.

I am speculating that maybe there is some target readout speed they wanted to hit for AF or some other goal, and there was a trade-off to be made here.

 

[CJaurelius]

Or there is another possibility: Canon conducted market research indicating that customers wanted both high MP and high fps but preferred high fps over high MP if push comes to shove. Jeff Cable definitely has this preference of having a high fps camera and but also wanting a bit more MP (he mentioned anything from 30 to 50 MP) to work with in his blog posts.

For whatever reason, Canon couldn't get a high MP + high fps sensor to work out, so decided to drop the high MP requirement.

Ding, Ding, Ding. More than likely Canon was in a position where they could either make the sensor 24MP and get the faster readout speed or increase to 30MP+ which would slow down the readout speed. So they did their market research and existing customers said between the two they would rather have faster readout speeds. So Canon made what was to them the best decision. Canon says hey we have the R5mii which is technically more megapixes and is faster than previous models so again from out customer base it will be good enough.

Meanwhile Sony and Nikon (Sony Sensor) both already have a higher megapixes faster readout sensor. So the outside market was waiting in anticipation that Canon would one up these cameras seeing that the A1 for example is 4 years old. The YouTube world which can't wait to get a new camera and make tons of new content sees the R1 and is extremely let down. Video after video goes out how the R1 isn't the true flagship.

People on this forum see it as an attack because they look at cameras through the lens Canon's existing userbase only. Feeding the cycle that Canon is for boomers.