RustyBug wrote:
Not to mention that the card slot remained SD ... i.e. current consumer oriented (which is fine for the price point). As others are moving toward faster card types, I couldn't quite see investing in something that wasn't future oriented. Again, nice enough for the price point (kinda sorta) ... i.e. still not a home run.
Pondering if a used R might become a backup bargain once the 5R hits the stores. Imo, anything that I'd be considering as a "backup bargain" ... well, that just doesn't quite conjure up the notion of Home Run, either.
On a camera like this it makes almost NO difference that the cards are SD. SD are cheap , easy to find and more than fast enough.
On the 1Dx ll and lll the only reason to need a faster card is not to shoot images but to shoot full-blown either 4K or 8K video.
If you are not gonna shoot more than HD video then it's a waste of money to use ultra expensive CFast and CFexpress cards!!! Being a consumer camera or a pro camera has nothing to do with it. Unfortunately the cameras have to be spec'd for their highest use, and that's video!
John
JohnSil wrote:
On a camera like this it makes almost NO difference that the cards are SD. SD are cheap , easy to find and more than fast enough.
On the 1Dx ll and lll the only reason to need a faster card is not to shoot images but to shoot full-blown either 4K or 8K video.
If you are not gonna shoot more than HD video then it's a waste of money to use ultra expensive CFast and CFexpress cards!!! Being a consumer camera or a pro camera has nothing to do with it. Unfortunately the cameras have to be spec'd for their highest use, and that's video!
John...Show more →
Huh? The CFExpress cards are crucial for the unlimited buffer and instant buffer clearing for stills on the 1DXIII. Very important for a pro stills camera. If the R5 uses SD UHS II cards it will be a huge (uh narrow) bottleneck for the buffer for 20 fps stills shooting.
Encoded 8K video in 16:9 at 30 fps is a piece of cake compared to the full sensor in lossless RAW at 20 fps.
Timothy OConn wrote:
Most camera releases don't live up to the hype. The normal pattern seems to be:
- rumor mill goes nuts
- camera is released with a number of rumored items incorrect.
- people get mad and bitch and moan on DPR
- time passes and people realise that it's not actually that bad.
- eventually a loyal following of users champion the camera, defending it against any criticism on DPR.
- rinse and repeat
You forgot one step....the successor comes out and all of a sudden the loyal users that have been championing it for the past 4 years finally start leaving honest comments about its' shortcomings instead of all the championing that was really just trying to justify their investment in the camera in the first place
arbitrage wrote:
You forgot one step....the successor comes out and all of a sudden the loyal users that have been championing it for the past 4 years finally start leaving honest comments about its' shortcomings instead of all the championing that was really just trying to justify their investment in the camera in the first place
Yes, I find that honeymoon period to be very funny. I have lost track of how many members on different forums really push a new model, but then weeks or months later, their tunes are very different. Of course we have the opposite, a few members that really push a model as being the best ever, like a couple I know around the EOS R. Fun times!
arbitrage wrote:
You forgot one step....the successor comes out and all of a sudden the loyal users that have been championing it for the past 4 years finally start leaving honest comments about its' shortcomings instead of all the championing that was really just trying to justify their investment in the camera in the first place
Yeah, my first DSLR, a 350D had a lot of shortcomings. No video, no IBIS, no eye AF, no deep learning. I admit it now.
The EOS-R5 should logically be an allround mirrorless pro body like the 5DIV is an allround pro dslr. There is not yet a reason to release a 1DX like mirrorless AF and speed monster because Canon still needs a couple of years to make the RF lenses for such a body, like a 300mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 400mm f2.8
Because the existing EF lenses adapt very well to the EOS-R, everybody seems to think that Canon will be content to develop a mirrorless top body without the neccessary EF lenses, but that is not like Canon.
Look at the EF lenses developed so far: they all fit a 5DIV like pro allround mirrorless body like a glove. Canon has most likely with intent worked on the lenses for the EOS-R5, and now they're here, it's time for the body. I don't expect super sports wildlife performance yet though, that is for what comes after, when they have the lenses ready.
alundeb wrote:
Huh? The CFExpress cards are crucial for the unlimited buffer and instant buffer clearing for stills on the 1DXIII. Very important for a pro stills camera. If the R5 uses SD UHS II cards it will be a huge (uh narrow) bottleneck for the buffer for 20 fps stills shooting.
Encoded 8K video in 16:9 at 30 fps is a piece of cake compared to the full sensor in lossless RAW at 20 fps.
We still don’t know under what circumstances it will reach 20fps, but I’m pretty sure it will not be when shooting lossless RAW 45MP stills. The 24MP Sony A9 has a stacked sensor (fastest readout there is) and can only reach 20fps shooting compressed RAW, but it does have a huge buffer that gets around the relative bottleneck of UHS-II SD cards to some extent
ChrisMak wrote:
The EOS-R5 should logically be an allround mirrorless pro body like the 5DIV is an allround pro dslr. There is not yet a reason to release a 1DX like mirrorless AF and speed monster because Canon still needs a couple of years to make the RF lenses for such a body, like a 300mm f2.8, 500mm f4, 400mm f2.8
Because the existing EF lenses adapt very well to the EOS-R, everybody seems to think that Canon will be content to develop a mirrorless top body without the neccessary EF lenses, but that is not like Canon.
Look at the EF lenses developed so far: they all fit a 5DIV like pro allround mirrorless body like a glove. Canon has most likely with intent worked on the lenses for the EOS-R5, and now they're here, it's time for the body. I don't expect super sports wildlife performance yet though, that is for what comes after, when they have the lenses ready....Show more →
The R5 should be an all around body like the 5D IV, but at 45MP it certainly is not.
wordfool wrote:
We still don’t know under what circumstances it will reach 20fps, but I’m pretty sure it will not be when shooting lossless RAW 45MP stills. The 24MP Sony A9 has a stacked sensor (fastest readout there is) and can only reach 20fps shooting compressed RAW, but it does have a huge buffer that gets around the relative bottleneck of UHS-II SD cards to some extent
Not sure how compressed raw on the A9 is but c-raw (lossy compressed) on Canon is great because there’s virtually no visible difference in IQ in real world practice.
EB-1 wrote:
The R5 should be an all around body like the 5D IV, but at 45MP it certainly is not.
EBH
I am at a loss regarding your resolution requirements. There will be three resolution classes from Canon in the new generation RF mount cameras. 20, 45 and 84 MP (roughly). Three resolutions with sensible doubling between. How can 45 in the middle not be an allround body?
wordfool wrote:
We still don’t know under what circumstances it will reach 20fps, but I’m pretty sure it will not be when shooting lossless RAW 45MP stills. The 24MP Sony A9 has a stacked sensor (fastest readout there is) and can only reach 20fps shooting compressed RAW, but it does have a huge buffer that gets around the relative bottleneck of UHS-II SD cards to some extent
Good point. But it only reinforces the fact that high speed cards are useful for stills. Higher speed cards could mean less limitations on possible file quality.
Fast cards is the way to go. Huge buffers will always suffer from long clearing times.
alundeb wrote:
I am at a loss regarding your resolution requirements. There will be three resolution classes from Canon in the new generation RF mount cameras. 20, 45 and 84 MP (roughly). Three resolutions with sensible doubling between. How can 45 in the middle not be an allround body?
It can not, because it is double of what I need. 20-24 is MY all around resolution.
... for those there will be a crop mode . Remember the EOS R for instance already provides EF-S compatibility (via adapter) and switching automatically into crop mode.
greenfield wrote:
... for those there will be a crop mode . Remember the EOS R for instance already provides EF-S compatibility (via adapter) and switching automatically into crop mode.
Ralph Conway wrote:
It can not, because it is double of what I need. 20-24 is MY all around resolution.
I would need only 12 MP as my all-round / low light camera, or when I want to do 20 fps without filling my card up. 4MP is enough if I want to see in the pitch black night. 28 Mp would be nice for general purpose excpet for landscape and cropping ability. No wait, make that 32 or I am going to die. Except for when my general purpose camera really needs to be no more than 20MP. 84 MP would be my all-round / landscape camera, as long as I don't go for 150 MP Phase one for dedicated landscape stuff. Shame there is no 400 MP available, to at least match large format film. 45 MP is just so useless, If they only made it 50 to make it not a downgrade from the 5DSR. No wait, that is going to hurt the noise. No more than 42 MP, or it will be a disaster. After thinking about it, why not 36 MP. That was so successful with the D800. It used to be the pinnacle of high res, but on the other hand now it is maybe a little lackluster for all-round use. This is so difficult. Maybe 40 blank is the answer after all. Hm. Nudge that up to 41. It is certainly still going to save the day compared to 45!
EB-1 wrote:
The R5 should be an all around body like the 5D IV, but at 45MP it certainly is not.
EBH
Actually, for me using the 7DII and looking to upgrade, a 45mp R5 would be ideal. The 32,5mp 90D is too much for my liking, so I would hope that Canon does not bring that sensor along to a possible mirrorless 7DII, which is unsure to ever materialize anyhow. So my personal hope is for a 45-50mp FF R body. I would not know otherwise what to put the 400DOII on.
But I agree, it will not be to everyone's liking. Perhaps Canon decided that they had to put something against the Nikon Z7 and the Sony A7RIV, and could not get away with yet another 30mp 5-series body.
alundeb wrote:
Good point. But it only reinforces the fact that high speed cards are useful for stills. Higher speed cards could mean less limitations on possible file quality.
Fast cards is the way to go. Huge buffers will always suffer from long clearing times.
I think it's going to be large cards. If that picture isn't fake, this huge door must be hiding something big.
Maybe a heatsink
alundeb wrote:
Huh? The CFExpress cards are crucial for the unlimited buffer and instant buffer clearing for stills on the 1DXIII. Very important for a pro stills camera. If the R5 uses SD UHS II cards it will be a huge (uh narrow) bottleneck for the buffer for 20 fps stills shooting.
Encoded 8K video in 16:9 at 30 fps is a piece of cake compared to the full sensor in lossless RAW at 20 fps.
I would be very surprised if the DIGIC inside the R5 could sustain 20 fps beyond the initial DRAM frame buffer. Shuffling data off the image sensor into memory @ 20fps is the easy part. Getting 45MP of data subsequently processed through DIGIC and ready to write out to CFE is a different matter. In other words, I would predict the media card wont be the bottleneck for the sustained fps.
snapsy wrote:
I would be very surprised if the DIGIC inside the R5 could sustain 20 fps beyond the initial DRAM frame buffer. Shuffling data off the image sensor into memory @ 20fps is the easy part. Getting 45MP of data subsequently processed through DIGIC and ready to write out to CFE is a different matter. In other words, I would predict the media card wont be the bottleneck for the sustained fps.
That doesn't sound right to me. If the buffer is before Digic, why do all cameras have unlimited buffer for jpg but very limited buffer for RAW?
