Update – Canon EOS R5 Mark II Specifications

I'm almost certain the R3 was intended to be the mark 1 of the R1 but they decided at the last minute that it wasn't up to the standards of what they wanted in a flagship camera, perhaps something to do with the competition at the time
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
I'm almost certain the R3 was intended to be the mark 1 of the R1 but they decided at the last minute that it wasn't up to the standards of what they wanted in a flagship camera, perhaps something to do with the competition at the time
Welcome, newest member of the "the R3 was meant to be the R1" conspiracy theory! :ROFLMAO:
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 7 users
Upvote 0
If all biodiesel are magnesium alloy freations with eye-control AF and massive shutterspeeds with minimal readout times, what's the point of the R1 over the R3 over the R5? Will the R3 be degraded to an aps-c version of the R1? The segmentation is getting a bit muddled.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
If all biodiesel are magnesium alloy freations with eye-control AF and massive shutterspeeds with minimal readout times, what's the point of the R1 over the R3 over the R5? Will the R3 be degraded to an aps-c version of the R1? The segmentation is getting a bit muddled.
biodiesel = spellchecker for bodies?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
I'm almost certain the R3 was intended to be the mark 1 of the R1 but they decided at the last minute that it wasn't up to the standards of what they wanted in a flagship camera, perhaps something to do with the competition at the time
The 1 series is released every 4 years. It is right on time. If what you and others have speculated, there would have been ad campaigns started and underway, mock ups and possibly printer proofs of the boxes, manuals and other literature for the R1 produced. Has anyone divulged any of this type material? Nope. Has anyone tweeted, or posted anywhere on social media pics, or scans or images of all this pre-production R1 material that would have been tossed away when they changed the camera to the R3? Nope. Glad you are almost certain. I am almost certain you are wrong. But feel free to be almost certain with absolutely no evidence whatsoever. You're not the first.
 
Upvote 0
If all biodiesel are magnesium alloy freations with eye-control AF and massive shutterspeeds with minimal readout times, what's the point of the R1 over the R3 over the R5? Will the R3 be degraded to an aps-c version of the R1? The segmentation is getting a bit muddled.
Quote: "If all biodiesel are magnesium alloy freations "
Could you please explain the meaning? I don't get it at all...:unsure:
Spellchecker running amuck?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
I'm actually debating a cheaper R3 to replace my R6, vs. trading my R5 for a mkII. The R5 is great but the files are a bit big for high volume sports shooting, which I (sort of) do. The R3 at a lower price would be great for me. No RS (practically) and smaller files to deal with. But we'll see what the prices settle to after announcements and availability. I was originally aiming for an R1 just to say I had one, but I bet it'll be hard to justify its cost for what I do.

<sinister speculation>
- Box style body
- square sensor
- evf is add-on, Minecraft block styling
- all buttons move to square from round
- square dials (a true innovation)
- limited rear LCD positions available (Canon is doomed cripple hammer)
</sinister speculation>

On FPS with battery - there was originally a rumor of a new battery with this body as well. Probably another LPE6 shape, but better chipped performance. Perhaps they will have improved the voltage profile such that full H+ speeds can be maintained below the half way point on the battery .

Brian
The R3 does seem good for you. If you want an R1, why not wait until the R1 is cheaper down the road?
 
Upvote 0
Other way around here. I want/need Eye AF! So, I'm extremely happy with this choice!
So much that I called most retailers in France and Germany, asking for a preorder possibilty. Nope! I'll have to wait for the official announcement by Canon. :)
It was a good try! Maybe offer an extra hundred euros and someone will do it!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Did Canon ever release a camera with a vertical-framing grip that wasn't a 1, until the R3?

It's possible they wanted to release a pro body, and didn't feel they had the technology ready to release something called a 1 at that point. Remember Covid was a headache for everyone and screwed up everything in those times. So they decided to do like they did with the EOS-3 around 1999, make a tweeny between the two normal steps.

So it seems some are thinking the R3 was literally going to be labeled R1, then at the last second they realized it wouldn't stack up and ran up a lot of R3 badging and did a global search and replace in the documentation. I don't think anyone can disprove that, or prove that (no photo of a trash can full of R1 badges has shown up by now so such proof probably doesn't exist) but it's not the only possibility.

What's also a possibility is that they had something grander in mind for R1, that required things that they saw simply wouldn't be ready, perhaps AI-related. (The idea of figuring out which player is nearest a ball and focusing on that person for instance. Or are any cameras able to be shown "Trump" and know to focus on "Trump" or similar? Or the sensor they patented around 2020 that would have no rolling shutter, electronic ND and a mode to double DR.) (I still expect there are things about the coming R1 that are under-rumored because they're too hard to explain, like this.) (And the issue may have been their internal R&D, or perhaps, CPU from vendor that could actually run the software fast enough, etc.) Anyway, they might have realized in late 2020 that there was really no hope of getting their planned feature set complete, and therefore went back a half-step to R3 to make a camera that many pros would love. In other words, the R3 may not be a camera they were planning on calling an R1, but rather, a back-up plan if they couldn't get all the features they wanted for an R1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
The number I can find on the interwebs is that the R5 has 15.5ms readout time, the R3 has a 5.5ms readout time, that would put the R5II around 4.3ms. The R3 number matches the flash sync speed of 1/180, 30% improvement gets that up (down?) to 1/235.

The 30fps is a slight let down, I really hoped it would beat the 40fps my R8 can do. But 30fps at 14-bit would still be a massive improvement over the R5!
4.3ms is rather slow considering the Z8/Z9 are at 3.73ms released over a year ago.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
The 30% better/faster than the R3 (meh) is most likely a number to throw people off. Readout speed would need to be considerably faster than the R3 which isn't as fast as the Nikon Z8/Z9 at 3.73ms. Those cameras were released in 2023 with technology already aged. Canon needs to break the 2ms readout speed at a minimum. Nikon's 3.73ms is good but it's a long ways from 2ms. Anything above 2ms Canon would be simply holding back. The "Wow" factor is a readout < 2ms or in micro seconds. 30% faster than the R3 is meh.
See sensor readout speeds and select ms:
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
I'm almost certain the R3 was intended to be the mark 1 of the R1 but they decided at the last minute that it wasn't up to the standards of what they wanted in a flagship camera, perhaps something to do with the competition at the time
The R3 has a readout speed slower than the Nikon Z8 and Z9. A lot slower. It's sensor readout is too slow to be a Canon "flagship". I would call it mediocre at best.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
I read r5 mk.2 has a video switch.. so with the r5c mark 2 how does that come into play?.

Is there any news on the r5c mk.2 release date?

Canonrumors guy posted awhile back a CR2 rumor that they were working on one.

I’ve also read R5 Mk.2 has enhanced video features with the switch so what’s the difference between the two then?
 
Upvote 0
As far as the rolling shutter speed that we have reported, we do have the exact number but that could get someone in trouble. It would also be the manufacturer claim.

We don't know if it's for video or stills at this time. If anyone knows a reputable source that tests rolling shutter for stills, please let us know.

For the moment, we trust CineD on the video side of things. The R3 shows a readout speed of 9.5ms, the EOS R5/R5 C 15.5ms. For a competitor reference, the Z8 shows 14.5ms. We don't know at this time how those speeds correlate to stills shooting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0