dmcphoto wrote:
AFAIK Canon has not confirmed the rumored pixel count of 45 MP. The only related rumor that was confirmed is that the camera will have some form of 8K video. I think 8K has pixel dimensions of 7680 × 4320. That's not a 2:3 aspect ratio, so you'd take the long side and multiply by .66 to get the minimum required short side for "full frame 35mm", giving 5120 px. That means the minimum sensor pixel dimensions would be 7680x5120, or 39.3 MP. Let's call it 40MP.
The real sensor could certainly be 45MP, but 8K video only confirms 40MP. 45 MP is in the ballpark, but so is 50MP. As long as we're fantasizing we may as well make it a good fantasy!...Show more →
I saw this post from Jim / Mustang thread so 45MP seems more reality than fantasy.
Don
Quote :
“My Canon insider has confirmed that I'll have two (my standard Canon order) R5 bodies by mid summer. The R5 will have IBIS, 45MP sensor, and shoot 8K30fps / 4K@120, what a machine that will be.....” https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/600984/410
Littlefield wrote:
I saw this post from Jim / Mustang thread so 45MP seems more reality than fantasy.
Don
Quote :
“My Canon insider has confirmed that I'll have two (my standard Canon order) R5 bodies by mid summer. The R5 will have IBIS, 45MP sensor, and shoot 8K30fps / 4K@120, what a machine that will be.....” https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/600984/410
If true, I'd buy this camera just to use with my 600mm f4 mkII instead of adapting it to my Sony bodies. The A9 and A7R4 work remarkably well with the Sony bodies and the Sigma MC-11, but I'd still prefer a native Canon body. The 90D did not cut it for me, along with the micro adjustments needed. The 90D is a nice camera, but just not great for wildlife for what I shoot.
The 90D probably should have been a mirrorless camera. I found the traditional DSLR AF to be too inconsistent with wide aperture lenses and moving subjects, yet in live view it was really good... So instead I'm now playing with an M6II and am pretty happy with it. The 90D ergonomics are better, but the small size of the M6II is sometimes an advantage.
artsupreme wrote:
This was exactly my point of the whole thread, wondering if will we actually get a sports camera and a wedding camera all in one body (R5)? History tells us no, but we'll see if Canon has changed course due to losing tons of customers to Sony.
If this R5 performed similar to the 7DII or better then I think it's a winner for sure if it truly does 12fps in AI servo @ 40MP+. I'm not expecting 1DX type tracking, but it could be close. Or who knows, it could match 1DX tracking for all we know. Can't wait to see how this one plays out. ...Show more →
If we get 7DII real-world quality of tracking (as opposed to on-paper stats) then I will be disappointed because I found the 7DII to be rather inconsistent and laggy compared to the 1DX/1DXII for fast-paced action. Mirrorless should have some inherent advantages over traditional DSLR PDAF and I hope shot to shot consistency from the R5 will be excellent. A colleague who tested the 1DXIII said he got seemingly 99.9% in focus while tracking moving subjects via 20fps live view... which offers some hope. Even if we get 80-85% of that, it should still be good. Just hope it will be half decently responsive.
mdvaden wrote:
The EOS R literally accomplished certain features that even Sony never attained so seamlessly.
arbitrage wrote:
Was that the feature of being able to shoot at a whopping 3FPS with Tracking Priority in AI Servo?
mdvaden wrote:
I get paid up to $800 per single photo shooting one frame per 5 seconds.
The mumbo jumbo you are writing about is a nothing burger in regards to what I get from the EOS R body.
If you can't succeed with an EOS R .. simple. Don't buy one.
I don't know why stating what one gets "paid" to shoot has anything to do with the specs of a camera, other than trying to say you are "better" than others. Money doesn't mean one is a better photographer than someone else. On that note, I can get same results from my A7r3 that I could with my 1Ds, 30D, Contax RX, etc etc etc IF shooting landscapes.
However, this past summer I started shooting wildlife with my A7r3, and got some good results with an active wolf hunt. No way a 3 or 5fps camera can get the same amount of keepers as a camera that has 2x the frame rate. I think that was the point. And most people here are on the same level as far as quality.
And arbitrage has some phenomenal work with wildlife that no way could be done with a lower frame rate camera.
Dustin Gent wrote:
I don't know why stating what one gets "paid" to shoot has anything to do with the specs of a camera, other than trying to say you are "better" than others. Money doesn't mean one is a better photographer than someone else.
Yes .. you "don't know"
Apparently you got confused because you missed the context of several replies about why something was said, and what it was said about. You aren't the first person who missed the point.
But the point is not what I'm worth, which may be even more. The point is WHAT the CANON EOS R is WORTH !! The point is that 5 seconds can earn 1/3 the price tag of a body, and that 12 fps (whatever) isn't a "home run" requirement.
Be nice if more people read more context first, then sit and ponder longer.
It seems that it is a home run for YOU, not the majority. I am not a fanboy and shoot what works for me. I don't even have any native Sony lenses for that matter.
Dustin Gent wrote:
It seems that it is a home run for YOU, not the majority. I am not a fanboy and shoot what works for me. I don't even have any native Sony lenses for that matter.
good for your success
Like I said, if the likes of Northrup and the Slanted Lens are publicizing that a $2000 body is what they are switching to for video, and that one introductory model adapts the entire legion of EF glass flawlessly, that's a home run at minimum. The body did what Canon wanted, so introduce the doorway to the future RF system.
It can even be further noted that Canon added practical benefits like a shutter to close dust. I find that feature far more useful than frames per second. But for an intro body, the EOS R paid for itself in about 6 photos and one wedding, and spared me selling some expensive EF glass.
I'm still taking a guess that Canon omitted a 2nd card because they did not want too many pros buying one before the next models came out. I think they purposely capped sales.
I don’t really care if you can take a good photo with the camera. That is a feat that is possible on a Canon Rebel XT.
You can’t call the EOS R a home run when Canon comes out and says in their earning statement that they’re behind in mirrorless and need to have a competitive offering.
You can say you personally enjoy it. It doesn’t make it a good camera relative to the competition. It certainly, absolutely, was not a home run. It was at best a single.
Jesse Evans wrote:
you can’t call the EOS R a home run
"CANON HIT A HOME RUN WITH THE EOS R !!"
Hey .. that was an easy "can" do.
Plus, the EOS R didn't lose mirrorless sales. it took away full frame mirrorless marketshare from Sony. Nikon took some too. But Canon is still King of the Hill. And the EOS R added one more building block.
I guess I should have said, you can't say it and be correct.
By next autumn, it won't matter whether the Canon EOS R was a home run or not. It will only matter what's on the shelves and what equipment people want to buy.
Personally, I like when folks with any brand can hang onto the expensive lenses they own. So I'm hoping Nikon does well too so the Nikon shooters can keep some accessories they've acquired over the years.
I don't understand why 12 fps with AF tracking at 45 MP would mean "blow the socks off everything else". It is about the minimum of what is required to compete with the existing offerings from the other major manufacturers. We have come a long way in low expectations if we call that a "hype". Now 20 fps is a different thing. I don't think we will see 1DXIII / A9 performance there.
alundeb wrote:
I don't understand why 12 fps with AF tracking at 45 MP would mean "blow the socks off everything else". It is about the minimum of what is required to compete with the existing offerings from the other major manufacturers. We have come a long way in low expectations if we call that a "hype". Now 20 fps is a different thing. I don't think we will see 1DXIII / A9 performance there.
Ha! You forgot we are talking about Canon here, lol. Expectations to "blow socks off" are definitely low compared to the competition, but what has Canon released that's anywhere close to 12fps in a FF body? Only the 1DXIII with 16fps @ 20MP mechanical but it's a $6500 camera. With that said, it seems like a tall order for Canon to release 12fps @ 40MP+ mechanical for a lot less money less $$, but we'll see (assuming R5 tracking performance is close to 1D performance).
I agree at this stage we shouldn't be hoping for the the R5 specs to not have caveats. But look how sad the R was compared to the competition? It was obsolete the day it was announced if you compare it's specs to competitors. But then again, the guy above considers it his "home run" so people bought it, and maybe this is why Canon has become complacent with their bodies.
There are different ways of looking at the recent history of small increments from Canon. In my opinion it makes it more likely, not less likely that they at some point step it up.
artsupreme wrote:
Ha! You forgot we are talking about Canon here, lol. Expectations to "blow socks off" are definitely low compared to the competition, but what has Canon released that's anywhere close to 12fps in a FF body? Only the 1DXIII with 16fps @ 20MP mechanical but it's a $6500 camera. With that said, it seems like a tall order for Canon to release 12fps @ 40MP+ mechanical for a lot less money less $$, but we'll see (assuming R5 tracking performance is close to 1D performance).
I agree at this stage we shouldn't be hoping for the the R5 specs to not have caveats. But look how sad the R was compared to the competition? It was obsolete the day it was announced if you compare it's specs to competitors. But then again, the guy above considers it his "home run" so people bought it, and maybe this is why Canon has become complacent with their bodies. ...Show more →
At the end of the day we take photos / video. There are not many cameras out there that are not capable of taking award winning photos / video. That being said yhy would someone say "blow socks off"? You have the 8k video, 4k 120p that is pretty good. 45mp@12, how many cameras are doing better? One? You have Canon's lens line up. Canon's menu systems, handling and usability. Canon's touch screen. Canon's Professional Service / Service. I think what is being overlooked is the new cloud system. Not only would you not need two card slots heck you wouldn't even need one. I don't trust technology that much and want my card slots, but still it is there for the tech savvy folks.
As the RF-platform (I love the lineup of f1.2 apertures) becomes more appealing I might eventually come back to Canon from a long trip (7 years Nikon, now 5th on Sony). To be honest up to this point I wasn't much missing Canon seeing all the "compromise" (how it looked to me) updates. However the R5 looks definitely interesting with all the (additional upcoming) lens offering. Will see the final specs (that's the tricky part) and what is Sony up to next.
As far I am concerned there where no mirrorless FF competitors to Canons and Nikons DSLRs no matter what features they had. Only Sony offered in my case not affordable bodies (A9 and A7 III). All the rest did not work for me because of the horrible EVFs. Nikon and Canon changed this with Z6, R & RP (Sony still does not offer a usable EVF in my price range). I was looking for a mirrorless system the last 5 years because of my age caused farsightedness. No EVF could compete with OVFs. That has changed with the last generation of mirrorless bodies like AF performance. I do not need 12/20 FPS nor 4/8K/or any video :-) - nice ad on gimmicks.
I do not miss anything in my 3rd (eight year old tech) Canon EOS 6D except a reliable EVF. And a joystick.
I think the 8K feature is dismissed too quickly - it's a showcase, but the real benefit is more flexibility of operation in lower res i.e. possibly faster frame rates and better quality slomo.
