It would make sense to make it available at this price-point. The R5 justifies the existence of their RF lineup—so they need to keep price low to sell many and raise their potential to sell the glass.
This price-point will put a damper on the Sony A7RIV—it's a consequence of their baby-step approach from last year. If they release an A7RV to combat the R5, they risk upsetting their existing customer base—I know I would be if I purchased the A7RIV last year.
Hmm... They broke with a decade+ habit of placing MENU and INFO buttons side by side on the left shoulder of the camera. I've seen the INFO button migrate on the smaller bodies but not on the "big" stuff yet. Guess a lot of people will have their muscle memory challenged.
Snopchenko wrote:
Hmm... They broke with a decade+ habit of placing MENU and INFO buttons side by side on the left shoulder of the camera. I've seen the INFO button migrate on the smaller bodies but not on the "big" stuff yet. Guess a lot of people will have their muscle memory challenged.
P.S. I'm not in the market for this anyway.
The sizes of the R bodies are too small for good ergonomics.
The most important thing they removed was that extra slide switch that could be programmed.
The AF controller seems rather high up and too close to the eyepiece. We'll have to see about that.
EB-1 wrote:
The sizes of the R bodies are too small for good ergonomics.
The most important thing they removed was that extra slide switch that could be programmed.
The AF controller seems rather high up and too close to the eyepiece. We'll have to see about that.
EBH
Still... seriously, the effin' RATE button? My OCD is piqued. I kinda like that the three EOS cameras I have access to - the 80D, the 1D Mark IV and my wife's 650D which I'm still using from time to time - have very similar layout in this regard. Well... no more.
Snopchenko wrote:
Still... seriously, the effin' RATE button? My OCD is piqued. I kinda like that the three EOS cameras I have access to - the 80D, the 1D Mark IV and my wife's 650D which I'm still using from time to time - have very similar layout in this regard. Well... no more.
Left side rear buttons are next to useless for me handholding big glass. The more buttons they move to the right the better. R5 seems to be a regression from R but has added way more right side functionality with joystick, proper scroll wheel and Q button so it is an improvement overall.
Canon has obviously put a lot of R&D time and investment into the R5. This project must go back 5 years (at least). I spent my life working in R&D in another high tech industry and will guess that the R5 is behind schedule, likely originally intended to launch with the L trio of zoom lenses. These kinds of major projects never go perfectly. Nevertheless it looks like its going to be a marvelous piece of engineering.
This forums and others seem to have narrowed down a key set of important questions:
1. Autofocus performance. The 1Dx3 feedback in mirrorless is quite positive. So the initial reviews of the R5 will be very interesting, esp the BIF tracking.
2. Stabilization performance. CR guy said a while ago he's seen a video of the R6 IBIS stabilization and that it's excellent. The announcement last week that EF lenses also benefit is a bonus. I assume the RF lenses will significantly outperform EF lenses in this regard.
3. EVF performance. Perhaps the 1Dx3 is a clue here. Presumably, the R5 EVF will perform similarly to the rear screen of the 1Dx3 in mirrorless mode. YouTube videos (e.g. Jared Polin's shooting women's NCAA basketball) look very smooth. What do others that own the 1Dx3 say about this?
4. Buffer capacity. This has been a major 'wow' item for many. In video it's particularly surprising that the camera can perform 8K on-the-fly compression to H.265, a processor intensive task. One possibility is that this will be quite limited due to heat generation (2 min?) but 8K video RAW recording can go until the CF Express card is full (at 80 GB/min for 10 bit 30p if I've calculated correctly). There's been some speculation that Canon is working with Samsung for their chips. This makes a lot of sense. Samsung has world class lithography capabilities and small, energy-sparing transistors will certainly be required for these data rates. Inferring again from 1Dx3, it looks likely that consecutive RAW stills for the R5 will be high capacity. The R5 will be moving roughly 1.7 times as much data as the 1Dx3 at full speed, but the latter seems to have nearly infinite capacity for consecutive RAWs.
5. Price. We should make no mistake that Canon intends to maximize their profitability with this camera. This is a once per decade(s) opportunity. They will use it as a lever to sell RF glass, so profit margin will benefit from both. When the 5D5 launched, for example, the EF glass was out there and buyers of the camera were only buying the camera. In the case of the R5, nearly every buyer will also be making RF lens purchases. The winning equation will be to keep camera price in check and thereby sell lots of profitable glass. The recent video from Canon USA confirms this IMO (yes, they directly refer to the 5D2, but they're dropping a very clear message with no face-saving way to back out).
My two cents. I will am considering buying an R5 and lenses immediately since I'm upgrading from 5d3 and am recently retired and chasing light a lot more often now. If the camera doesn't deliver, I'll switch to Sony. I think the odds heavily favor an R5 purchase, but time will tell.
Aren't those all the MICL bodies? I'm not seeing any normal cameras to compare it with.
They should show the back of the 5D IV to see what features have been moved or removed.
EB-1 wrote:
Aren't those all the MICL bodies? I'm not seeing any normal cameras to compare it with.
They should show the back of the 5D IV to see what features have been moved or removed.
sskings wrote:
Canon has obviously put a lot of R&D time and investment into the R5. This project must go back 5 years (at least). I spent my life working in R&D in another high tech industry and will guess that the R5 is behind schedule, likely originally intended to launch with the L trio of zoom lenses. These kinds of major projects never go perfectly. Nevertheless it looks like its going to be a marvelous piece of engineering.
This forums and others seem to have narrowed down a key set of important questions:
1. Autofocus performance. The 1Dx3 feedback in mirrorless is quite positive. So the initial reviews of the R5 will be very interesting, esp the BIF tracking.
2. Stabilization performance. CR guy said a while ago he's seen a video of the R6 IBIS stabilization and that it's excellent. The announcement last week that EF lenses also benefit is a bonus. I assume the RF lenses will significantly outperform EF lenses in this regard.
3. EVF performance. Perhaps the 1Dx3 is a clue here. Presumably, the R5 EVF will perform similarly to the rear screen of the 1Dx3 in mirrorless mode. YouTube videos (e.g. Jared Polin's shooting women's NCAA basketball) look very smooth. What do others that own the 1Dx3 say about this?
4. Buffer capacity. This has been a major 'wow' item for many. In video it's particularly surprising that the camera can perform 8K on-the-fly compression to H.265, a processor intensive task. One possibility is that this will be quite limited due to heat generation (2 min?) but 8K video RAW recording can go until the CF Express card is full (at 80 GB/min for 10 bit 30p if I've calculated correctly). There's been some speculation that Canon is working with Samsung for their chips. This makes a lot of sense. Samsung has world class lithography capabilities and small, energy-sparing transistors will certainly be required for these data rates. Inferring again from 1Dx3, it looks likely that consecutive RAW stills for the R5 will be high capacity. The R5 will be moving roughly 1.7 times as much data as the 1Dx3 at full speed, but the latter seems to have nearly infinite capacity for consecutive RAWs.
5. Price. We should make no mistake that Canon intends to maximize their profitability with this camera. This is a once per decade(s) opportunity. They will use it as a lever to sell RF glass, so profit margin will benefit from both. When the 5D5 launched, for example, the EF glass was out there and buyers of the camera were only buying the camera. In the case of the R5, nearly every buyer will also be making RF lens purchases. The winning equation will be to keep camera price in check and thereby sell lots of profitable glass. The recent video from Canon USA confirms this IMO (yes, they directly refer to the 5D2, but they're dropping a very clear message with no face-saving way to back out).
My two cents. I will am considering buying an R5 and lenses immediately since I'm upgrading from 5d3 and am recently retired and chasing light a lot more often now. If the camera doesn't deliver, I'll switch to Sony. I think the odds heavily favor an R5 purchase, but time will tell.
I just want it to be able to eye AF & animal eye AF track from 100% of the sensor with no sudden losses of tracking.
That includes if the subjects turns or runs around like crazy and then it should immediately reacquire with no lag.
I think that Canon has not not just match the SONY A9 II with this, it needs to leapfrog it to truly make an impact.
Checking in...you would think we would have the full specs by now. Are they just holding out because of the covid delays? When will this thing be released?
This is same old surprising issue that happens, specialized chips are always able to outperform general purpose chips as the instructions that they process are specific and often higher level. There is no defying the laws of physics here, its optimizing the processing pipelines and taking smart shortcuts / tradeoffs. If you are old enough, you have seen this transition happen time and time again.
Nice hardware setup thoug - are you running NVME only?
stanj wrote:
Well, dude, I don't know because I work in the software and not hardware realm, but at one of my prior camera companies we used FPGAs over GPUs because of their huge performance gain for the task at hand. But I'm not the hardware guy.
Either they're lying, which I find unlikely, or their chips (ASICs) are indeed better (for this task) than your GPU. I have a hunch that the image quality will be decent, too, or they'll be the laughing stock.
