Dlang wrote:
If these use CFexpress, Sony is in big trouble.
Hoping they push these updates to the 1DX!
I'm sure they will push the Animal AF and any other subject tracking improvements to the 1DXIII. But possibly only in LV which will severely limit the use cases.
It is also fairly confirmed it will have 1CFE and 1SDUHS-II....I'd prefer dual CFE but good enough....
This sounds like a perfect A7RIV replacement but it won't have a fast enough readout to replace my A9II....20FPS will basically be a useless spec so it will be a 12FPS, mechanical shutter camera for anything that moves just as the RIV is a 10FPS, mechanical shutter camera for anything that moves. I guess I'll be back to a 3 system setup later this year....because I'm not giving up my 500PF so Nikon stays in the kit to a very limited extent
Animal AF with the novelty of choosing explicitly for "BIRDS". 45mp FF sensor, close to my personal sweet spot. DPAF accuracy. IBIS that hopefully also works in tandem with EF lens IS via adapter. Conventional joystick to replace the EOS-R touchbar (that nobody seemed to want anyway).
Could this finally be a Canon camera that stops people fleeing Canon for the bodies?
As a Sony, Fuji and Nikon user, I'm very excited about this camera. Hoping to add a Canon in my future as I've always liked their glass. How much do you think this beast will cost?
arbitrage wrote:
but it won't have a fast enough readout to replace my A9II....20FPS will basically be a useless spec so it will be a 12FPS,
Where have you read anything about the readout speed? Do you have a link you could share that backs that statement up?
I've not seen any major distortion issues of fast moving subjects with the 1DXIII @ 20fps in LV with only 1/60 ROS. Nothing as horrible as the massive distortion A7R4 and all previous models at least.
Again, I'm very optimistic of this R5 and even more so with the latest news we are hearing now. I don't think you or anyone one else around here knows what the readout speed is going to be.
All the "speculations" from the naysayers, based on Canons previous behavior, is proving to be WAY off track every time we get more information about this R5.
It appears as though there is going to be a rather large shortage of crow very soon.
arbitrage wrote:
I'm sure they will push the Animal AF and any other subject tracking improvements to the 1DXIII. But possibly only in LV which will severely limit the use cases.
It is also fairly confirmed it will have 1CFE and 1SDUHS-II....I'd prefer dual CFE but good enough....
This sounds like a perfect A7RIV replacement but it won't have a fast enough readout to replace my A9II....20FPS will basically be a useless spec so it will be a 12FPS, mechanical shutter camera for anything that moves just as the RIV is a 10FPS, mechanical shutter camera for anything that moves. I guess I'll be back to a 3 system setup later this year....because I'm not giving up my 500PF so Nikon stays in the kit to a very limited extent...Show more →
How do we know the readout speed won’t be fast enough? I haven’t read a single rumor about the sensor performance.
lighthound wrote:
Where have you read anything about the readout speed? Do you have a link you could share that backs that statement up?
I've not seen any major distortion issues of fast moving subjects with the 1DXIII @ 20fps in LV with only 1/60 ROS. Nothing as horrible as the massive distortion A7R4 and all previous models at least.
Again, I'm very optimistic of this R5 and even more so with the latest news we are hearing now. I don't think you or anyone one else around here knows what the readout speed is going to be.
All the "speculations" from the naysayers, based on Canons previous behavior, is proving to be WAY off track every time we get more information about this R5.
It appears as though there is going to be a rather large shortage of crow very soon.
highdesertmesa wrote:
How do we know the readout speed won’t be fast enough? I haven’t read a single rumor about the sensor performance.
We don't know but if they couldn't pull off faster than 1/60 in a 20MP flagship $7K body then the chances they can pull off faster in a 45MP high end body is very unlikely.
I'll be the first to congratulate them if they do and I'm likely buying the camera regardless as I stated up thread.
But if anyone is going to be eating crow when it comes to predicting the readout speed, I'd be betting on you two
You can check out the distortion from the 1/60th readout of the 1DXIII at the 18:06 mark of Gordan's excellent review video.
I am certain there will be people who will find something to complain about when the R5 is released but it sounds like it is going to be a great camera whenever it is released. Too bad about supply chain issues right now but those will improve as COVID case counts drop over the next 6 mo.
lighthound wrote:
Where have you read anything about the readout speed? Do you have a link you could share that backs that statement up?
I've not seen any major distortion issues of fast moving subjects with the 1DXIII @ 20fps in LV with only 1/60 ROS. Nothing as horrible as the massive distortion A7R4 and all previous models at least.
Again, I'm very optimistic of this R5 and even more so with the latest news we are hearing now. I don't think you or anyone one else around here knows what the readout speed is going to be.
All the "speculations" from the naysayers, based on Canons previous behavior, is proving to be WAY off track every time we get more information about this R5.
It appears as though there is going to be a rather large shortage of crow very soon.
I think there are plenty of us who would happily eat many servings of crow, I know I would. I have been waiting to eat crow for many years but it's never been served, so maybe the surplus has built up and it's time for some tasty black bird. Licking my chops now...
We don't know but if they couldn't pull off faster than 1/60 in a 20MP flagship $7K body then the chances they can pull off faster in a 45MP high end body is very unlikely.
I'll be the first to congratulate them if they do and I'm likely buying the camera regardless as I stated up thread.
But if anyone is going to be eating crow when it comes to predicting the readout speed, I'd be betting on you two
Who said they couldn't "pull it off" on the 1DX3? Maybe they decided they wanted to entice the flagship users over to mirrorless in the next year or so by hanging a carrot (R5) in front of them and decided to tease them by giving them a taste of what mirrorless offers via a gimped version in LV.
And nope no crow for me please. Not one single time have I claimed or predicted what the read speed is going to be. I may be incredibly handsome and a master of nothing, but I'm surely not Nostradamus and can not predict the future.
With that said however, I do keep my fingers crossed with great hopes for this R5.
Truth is, 12 fps mechanical is plenty for me. Especially with the all new "BET" AF system (Birdie Eyeball Tracking).
Is the mention of nine new lenses for 2020 an increase?
With the counting of the extenders as lenses, not accessories, and the announcement of the 100-500 and kit 24-105, I seem to remember we were left expecting just three more new lenses for 2020 not too long ago.
Maybe there is still some hope for a great white in RF mount. A 500/5.6 doing to DO anyone?
juststeve wrote:
Is the mention of nine new lenses for 2020 an increase?
With the counting of the extenders as lenses, not accessories, and the announcement of the 100-500 and kit 24-105, I seem to remember we were left expecting just three more new lenses for 2020 not too long ago.
Maybe there is still some hope for a great white in RF mount. A 500/5.6 doing to DO anyone?
It had always been nine since R5 announcement and the graph Canon showed lists the extenders as part of those 9. So we were looking for 5 more.
The fact that they are releasing a 2xTC that isn't compatible with the 70-200/2.8 and would be a stretch to make work well on the 100-500 due to the slow aperture...I can only assume (and hope) that there is some super tele coming in those remaining five. Otherwise the 2xTC just makes no sense unless they just wanted to get it out there because it was ready and will release compatible lenses for it in 2021
Arbitrage, seeing the upcoming lens graph in large scale is a help remembering the announced plan. Good to see it in a large more easily read size.
Having the extenders listed as lenses rather than accessories was always a bit off-putting to me. Especially, in light of their not being compatible with the 70-200/ 2.8 L. With there being five open slots left for new lenses, it does give one hope for a great white of some sort.
If the right one were available, it might make for some tough choices. I have a 400/2.8 L IS in reserve now, having been pushed aside by the highly capable and much lighter 500/4 L IS ii. But if the RF great whites deliver on the promise of high speed camera-lens communication allowing IBIS and lens IS working together and perhaps better focus performance too, it might be hard to pass up on just the right RF great white.
My personal feeling has been the first RF great white would be the 300/2.8. With 45 MP available it gives one almost as many pixels per duck as a 1DXiii with a 500. And with the R5 having 12 fps available and a very sophisticated and able focusing system, a 300/2.8 and R5 would make a formidable sports camera at the Olympics. But with the Olympics perhaps in jeopardy it could be Canon's priorities are changing and maybe a 400, 500 or 600 tele lens might be the first out. Canon has certainly continued to research and patent new DO lenses so I cannot help but wonder if an early great white for the RF could be a DO.
I was thinking about this whole teleconverter issue, and while I think it would be quite odd, the amount of space between the back of the lens element of the RF 70-200 and the length of the protrusion of the teleconverters appears to be the exact same...
It probably would not work due to the risk to the rear element of the 70-200, so it is probably wishful thinking that they may have some solution.
Jesse Evans wrote:
I was thinking about this whole teleconverter issue, and while I think it would be quite odd, the amount of space between the back of the lens element of the RF 70-200 and the length of the protrusion of the teleconverters appears to be the exact same...
It probably would not work due to the risk to the rear element of the 70-200, so it is probably wishful thinking that they may have some solution.
