Official announcement of the Canon EOS R1 is now expected in July

[Canon Rumors]

Yes. But billboards tend to be larger. It has been drilled in my head that one needs a large format camera for proper billboard advertizing photography.

Billboards are printed at like 20dpi on technical printers. They were doing them with 10mp......

 

[Robert Stone]

Hahahaha, so your audience is select???, if your statement were real, they wouldn't put their noses in your footprint looking for the pixel!!!!! As a photographer since the time of cinema and who has been in art galleries, the select public DOES NOT put their nose in your footprint. Being in museums or art galleries today does not mean that a photographer is good, only that he can do it, because he can pay for it or has contacts.

Just came to say that this was always the case. In most circumstances since the beginning of photo and the beginning of art. Sadly connections trump talent. I’m not THAT famous I just mean I’m not totally just someone talking out my behind.

It’s a new world and I was in a show with someone who used the Fuji 100s and I had used my 30mp 5D IV and his images were just so much sharper than mine at the size we were both printing (around 20” x 24” up to 40” x 60”) and I was told by the gallery that I need to stop using older equipment if I want to compete in the next few years.

I love Canon… but they just aren’t keeping up compared to Nikon / Sony. They used to LEAD, I don’t think they are in the lead here. They look like 3rd place. I hope something changes.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I love Canon… but they just aren’t keeping up compared to Nikon / Sony.

I do not understand how you used the example of Canon not keeping up with Fuji to come to the conclusion that Canon is not keeping up with Nikon and Sony.
You would have been in the same situation had you used any Nikon or Sony camera.
If you are going to switch then switching to Fuji would make a lot more sense.

 

[Michael Clark]

I'm sorry but the 5 series and the 1 series have never and will never be competing against each other, they are marketed for different people. If you can't see that I'm not sure how else to explain it. completely different build, speed and resolution, not to mention purposes of use. There is no "crippling" to make one just cheaper than the other, that's nonsense and misunderstanding of how these cameras are designed.

I would agree they are built for different purposes and use cases.

I would disagree that there are no photographers for whom each one would be the best tool for different use cases within the work they do.

 

[Michael Clark]

"Flagship" is a weird term in general... Is it the most expensive body? Is it the fastest FPS? Is it the most mp? Is it the most rugged? Does it have to have a ergonomic grip built-in?
The A1/Z9 certainly changed what a lot of people called a flagship but I don't think that it really matters anymore.
The A9iii does different stuff to the A1 and the R1 will do different stuff than the R5ii
Canon had 2 x 1D bodies before they were combined into the 1DX

In effect, the 1D Mark IV continued with the 1D X while the 1Ds Mark III continued with the 5D Mark III.

Yes, Canon claimed the 18MP FF 1D X replaced both the "fast" handling 16MP APS-H 1D Mark IV and the higher resolution 21.1MP FF 1Ds Mark III. But actions sometimes speak louder than words.

The 22MP FF 5D Mark III was the first Canon DSLR to boast Canon's highest resolution sensor that was not a 1Ds model. It's no coincidence The 5D Mark III was also the first 5-series camera to have a pro-level AF system, much improved over the consumer level AF system of the 5D Mark II. Nor was it a coincidence that the 5D Mark III was introduced and went on sale the same month the 1D X began shipping.

Since many 1Ds users were doing studio work or weddings/events with them, the lack of 1-series ruggedness and integrated grip wasn't as big a deal as some might think. A lot of 1Ds users migrated to the 5D Mark III or its successor, the 5D Mark IV.

 

[Michael Clark]

Canon and Nikon had traditionally offered two (1D / 1Ds, and D3 / D3x) for a long time until both of them merged the lineup, so it is not without precedent to offer two. That said, given how close the R1 is to the R3 in terms of market positioning, I can't see them continuing to manufacture the R3 once the R1 launches, so I think Canon will go back to a single integrated grip flagship body like Nikon.

I don't think Sony is going to offer an integrated grip in any camera now or in the future -- one of their "5 fundamentals" for their cameras is "compactness", and adding an integrated grip runs counter to that.

You're forgetting the D3s, which was perhaps the most most successful of all of the D3 series Nikon bodies. It replaced the D3 and added much better low light performance (around 2 stops!) and AF accuracy. It was also the first Nikon FF ILC body to offer video recording.

And the D3X was a "one and done" as a FF model (unless you count the APS-C D1/D2 series). There was no D4X, D5X, or D6X.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Since many 1Ds users were doing studio work or weddings/events with them, the lack of 1-series ruggedness and integrated grip wasn't as big a deal as some might think. A lot of 1Ds users migrated to the 5D Mark III or its successor, the 5D Mark IV.

And now the R5 and R5II. No doubt there are some who want the ruggedness or integrated grip of a 1-series body and also want higher MP. I just fail to understand why they believe Canon is required to satisfy their wants, nor do I understand why people feel compelled to predict dire consequences for Canon for not doing so.

 

[Michael Clark]

The problem is I WOULD be their target audience. I would spend double the money on a 48mp R1s over a 45mp R5 any day (I used 48 because the 1 series all ways has some odd MP number). At this point I’d settle for a 41mp R1, but 24… nope.

I want the vertical grip, better battery, and heartier body and better buttons. And no, adding a vertical grip on the R5 is not an option because it ruins the water resistance/integrity of the sealing.

I've used my gripped 5D series and 7D series bodies in some pretty messy environmental conditions and never had even a hint of any water leakage via the grip/body interfaces. The seals between the grip and the battery well are just as good as the seals between the battery cover door and the battery well.

 

[Michael Clark]

And now the R5 and R5II. No doubt there are some who want the ruggedness or integrated grip of a 1-series body and also want higher MP. I just fail to understand why they believe Canon is required to satisfy their wants, nor do I understand why people feel compelled to predict dire consequences for Canon for not doing so.

Yet at times when people express a desire for something they're accused of also saying Canon HAS to do that or will suffer dire consequences, when they haven't really said that at all.

 

[Michael Clark]

Also, think about the psychological effect, if 90% of sports shooters are Canon and the other 10% are Nikon (or whatever the numbers are) and all these Nikon people have had the 45mp for 2 years and then Canon flops a 24mp… imagine being heckled every day by the Nikon guys (and gals and others). With all those people having to change Mount systems anyway, they are going to be in a position to make a decision and it’s a reason to switch camps to Nikon. Why would you stick to Canon if they aren’t keeping up.

Sports shooters, at least the pros doing it for a living, don't heckle each other about gear. That's the quickest way to be seen as an amateur among the pros. They heckle each other about chimping too much and missing a play, or being in the wrong spot at the wrong time so referee butts block their shot of the game's key moment.

 

[Michael Clark]

"All of the others" would be Nikon and Sony,
Nikon pretty much cannibalized the Z 9 with the Z 8.
Canon needs to compete against the Z 8.
Going after the Z 9 now would not make much sense.
Although, it does not make much sense to have the R1 and R3 targeting the same market either.
On the other hand, the R3 is now the more affordable alternative for pros who pay for their own gear.

It also remains to be seen how long the R3 will be in Canon's catalog, or if there will ever be an R3 Mark II.

 

[Michael Clark]

The AP might disagree with you there. If you’re the market leader in the segment there’s probably somebody always looking to dethrone you.

Didn't the AP officially move to Sony?

AP to equip all visual journalists globally with Sony Imaging products | The Associated Press

Sony Electronics Inc., a global leader in imaging, and The Associated Press, the trusted global news organization, announced today a new collaboration that will make Sony the exclusive imaging products and support provider for AP news photographers and video journalists around the world.

www.ap.org

 

[Michael Clark]

I agree with most of what you are saying, but I probably have a different definition of ‘small and incremental’. I’ve compared the Canon EOS 5D with the Mark II, Mark III, and Mark IV. My conclusion is that many ‘small changes’ made, for me, good reasons to upgrade.
Summary of changes:

Sensor Resolution:

• 5D: 12.8 megapixels
• Mark II: 21.1 megapixels
• Mark III: 22.3 megapixels
• Mark IV: 30.4 megapixels

Autofocus System:

• 5D: 9-point AF
• Mark II: 9-point AF (1 cross-type point)
• Mark III: 61-point AF (41 cross-type points), center point effective at f8
• Mark IV: 61-point AF (41 cross-type points), all effective at f8

Drive:

• 5D: 3 fps
• Mk II: 3.9 fps
• Mk III: 6 fps
• Mk IV: 7 fps

Video:

• 5D: No video
• Mark II: 1080p video
• Mark III: Improved 1080p video
• Mark IV: 4K video

Dynamic range (From DXO)

• 5D: 11.1 stops
• Mark II: 11.9 stops
• Mark III: 11.7 stops
• Mark IV: 13.6 stops

New features on the 5D Mk IV:

• GPS built in
• Wifi built in
• Lower noise
• Dual pixel RAW
• Touch screen

Then there are the use case features, which can make a world of difference for those who need them, but don't mean much of anything for those who don't need them.

For example: The 5D Mark III did not have anti-flicker/flicker reduction. The 5D Mark IV does. For those shooting sports under lights that flicker at 120 Hz, this was revolutionary. Instead of 3/10 shots being keepers due to the other 7 having moderate to severe color shifts from one side of the frame to the other, all of a sudden 9/10 shots could be keepers in the hands of someone who knows how to use the AF system properly.

 

[Michael Clark]

I agree it depemds on the speed of sensor and of the chipset. I makes sense all those cameras have similar throughput since they all have the DIGIC X inside.

But what I am saying, is that for me, considering the ways I shoot, going beyond a certain speed is meaningless to me. And that speed is below 10 FPS for me. I will take higher resolution any time though.

DiG!C X is not A processor, per se. It is a processor architecture with various different processors of varying speed and capacity. Similar in concept to various "Rocket Lake" or "Zen 5" CPUs.

The newer cameras with DiG!C X have more powerful processors than the older ones do.

 

[Michael Clark]

The R6 was still available for some time after the R6ii was released. It wasn't clear to me if this was just excess stock at retailers or Canon in-country but I imagine that they would run stocks down prior to the release of a new model anyway.
I expect the R5 to still be available for some time to come. It will provide an interesting market segmentation given I don't expect the price to rise from the current USD2900.

The 5Div is still available for sale in US, Japan and Australia (at least) 4 years after the R5. If Canon wanted to push hard to mirrorless then discontinuing it was make sense. The 1DXiii will be on sale for a long time after the R1 is released though.

I've really been surprised that the 5D mark IV has yet to be discontinued. It would be interesting to know when the last ones were manufactured, and if that was after 2020?

 

[koenkooi]

DiG!C X is not A processor, per se. It is a processor architecture with various different processors of varying speed and capacity. Similar in concept to various "Rocket Lake" or "Zen 5" CPUs.

The newer cameras with DiG!C X have more powerful processors than the older ones do.

While I don't doubt that newer variants are indeed more powerful, the generation used in the R6II/R8 made a huge leap in power efficiency, especially for video. It doubled the length of video you could shoot on a single charge.

The R5II seems to have slightly worse battery life than the R5 (based on the early one-day-only reviews), so I suspect that the extra "Digic Accelerator" and/or the sensor consume a lot more power. We'll see how it performs with production units after the first firmware update