What is your Wishlist features for a R5MII feature set? MY top 3 are:
(1) Cross Sensors or better AI Algorithm so grass detect issue is mitigated, this is likely given that they have this in R1 now
(2) 5Ghz connectivity with the app so remote shooting of moving subjects can be done
(3) Better battery life, specially in cold
Outside of these 3 features, I am superbly happy with my R5MII; What about you?
You can pretty much forget about Cross type focus sensor design as that's exclusive to the top of the line R1. Canon is famous for distinctions between their flagship and lower models. I find battery life just fine. Frankly considering how long I'd be outdoors in freezing temperatures the batteries will far outlast me. . I'm finding the tweak they did with firmware 1.1.1 sure did spark a nice fast locking of the focusing and it stays put on mine so I have no complaints.
(1) Allow users to over-ride the video/photo switch with M-Fn button to allow a true hybrid shooter to switch back and forth without requiring a 3rd hand like the old R5.
(2) Allow user to select up to 30fps for interval timer mode. Something like 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30 fps as options. The feature currently only allows you to shoot 1fps which is ridiculous. You should be able to select whatever fps you want, hit the shutter button, and let the camera shoot until it buffers, and then chug along until it overheats or battery dies. This seems like it should be very easy to do with firmware and I wish Canon would do it someday. It would save me thousands of dollars by allowing me to use a team of cameras instead of a team of photographers.
(3) Tilt screen LCD
(4) True 4k 60
(5) Better sensor tech
Other than the above, the R5II is nearly the perfect all-around camera that can do it all.
artsupreme wrote:
(2) Allow user to select up to 30fps for interval timer mode. Something like 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30 fps as options. The feature currently only allows you to shoot 1fps which is ridiculous. You should be able to select whatever fps you want, hit the shutter button, and let the camera shoot until it buffers, and then chug along until it overheats or battery dies. This seems like it should be very easy to do with firmware and I wish Canon would do it someday. It would save me thousands of dollars by allowing me to use a team of cameras instead of a team of photographers. ...Show more →
I can only guess at the multi-camera scenarios you encounter, but would some of it be possible with some of the cameras remotely triggered from a manned location, either from the camera a photographer is using, or by an observer capable of deciding when to fire the remote cameras?
R5III improvements I'd like to see:
- Faster stacked sensor so that flash sync in e-shutter is more in the 1/250 range. Faster readout would also mean better AF performance. I would not care if it meant DR or high ISO noise performance does not improve over the R5II as my preference is always for more speed.
- 40+ fps.
- Better battery life.
- Vertical and horizontal line AF sensitivity; AKA cross sensitivity as found in the R1. By the time the R5III is released in ~2.5-3 years, there should be no reason for this to be exclusively an R1 capability. Especially if the competition has it.
- RAW at lower FF resolutions, especially if the III's MP count increases. 45MP is nice but I don't need it a lot of times and would rather speed up the workflow and reduce storage consumption.
- RAW multi-shot pixel-shift options including 4-frame full RGB capture and 8/16 frames higher resolution capture.
- Dual readout per pixel to extend DR: first readout would be a few stops underexposed to preserve highlight information and combined with the second/final full-well readout. Kind of wonder if this would already be possible with Canon's current dual-pixel sensor architecture by reading out one of the two pixel halves earlier than the other.
- AF responsiveness equivalent to the R1. The R5II is definitely better than the cameras before it, but I still think the R1 has an edge in certain use cases.
- Better, more refined pre-capture, particularly addressing apparent AF performance issues.
While they're working on the R5III, Canon can also release an R1s higher MP camera to satisfy the demand for more resolution in a truly pro body.
RustyRus wrote:
4K60 fine
less high ISO noise
Allow for shutter above 1/8000 of a second on aperture priority mode without going into manual mode (so stupid)
Agreed, that one is really stupid and will hopefully be in the next one, if not fixed by FW in R5II before then.
rscheffler wrote:
I can only guess at the multi-camera scenarios you encounter, but would some of it be possible with some of the cameras remotely triggered from a manned location, either from the camera a photographer is using, or by an observer capable of deciding when to fire the remote cameras?
Imagine wrangling and coordinating a herd of 100 horses sprinting at you in a pasture and the goal of the shoot is to try and get a wrangler riding behind them and without any overlapping of the horses in front (think Marlboro Man) I need to stay super stealth as not to spook the horses and hope to get the shot where the wrangler is visible and styling behind the stampede. I have one attempt at it and it comes down to a lot of luck, so the more camera angles the better. Instead of hiring multiple photographers, it could very well be that one of the remote cameras gets the money shot instead, but this is not possible with 1fps.
I also have scenarios in expensive wave pools where I've had to hire 5 other photographers for different angles in hopes to get the one money shot. Again, it comes down to a lot of luck in some cases, so if I could have all cameras firing at once instead of using labor it would be great. I don't trust the wireless stuff for shoots like this where you have one attempt at the Hail Mary.
Basically it sounds like you need tracking mounts for the cameras and some sort of AI to recognize and follow the subject around the area where they're supposed to be. 10+ years ago I came across a promo video by a Japanese university that had developed a 1000fps object tracking system. It would literally keep a bouncing ball dead center in the frame. I'm honestly very surprised that this has not yet been adopted by the major sports leagues, at the least for secondary camera angles or replays.
The horses one sounds very challenging.
I've found wireless triggers can become dramatically less reliable around fast moving water...
FWIW I recently did a relatively slow-paced theatre/stage event where I set up a few remote cameras to augment the coverage. I was going to simply let them run on interval timer set to fire every second or two, but ended up just giving my wife a radio transmitter to fire all of them at key moments. I think that was the right decision because she definitely nailed the key moments. I could have also triggered the remotes from a transmitter on my camera, but then I would have been inundated by a ton more images.
I just want the S version with 100MP. GFX100 users are using 100MP on EF L glass all the time, so it would be nice to have that option in Canon.
I should add that 96MP is actually the most obvious spot. You can pixel bin 4:1 if you don't want 96MP and it becomes a 24MP output. You could still do 6K RAW the same as before, but I'd guess 8K would become tricky at that resolution.
EDIT: Actually it would seem that ~101MP would make the most sense.
45MP x 1.5 squared = 101.25MP. That would allow for a 3 -> 2 pixel down sample to retain the full sensor width and use 8K video. Then you would simply crop that a small amount to retain 6K with the 4:1 binning.
rscheffler wrote:
- 40+ fps.
- Better battery life.
- Vertical and horizontal line AF sensitivity; AKA cross sensitivity as found in the R1. By the time the R5III is released in ~2.5-3 years, there should be no reason for this to be exclusively an R1 capability. Especially if the competition has it.
- RAW at lower FF resolutions, especially if the III's MP count increases. 45MP is nice but I don't need it a lot of times and would rather speed up the workflow and reduce storage consumption.
I don't know of a good way to say that's basically just describing an R1. There isn't really a need for a new R5 to become something that already exists, unless you are hoping for a smaller body or the same features at a cheaper price point. An R6 3 might fit all of those same goals at that lower resolution. So it could potentially make more sense to use an R6 as a companion to an R1, or more likely you just need Canon to make an R1 that isn't lacking features versus their other bodies.
It does bring the up the point though of what will continue to be the feature differentiation. If every camera has similar AF, enough frame rate, enough resolution, then there isn't really much of a difference between models. The current stand out features of the 5 series are unmatched resolution and 8K video, neither of which are available on any other series. If the R5 were to pick up the requested things above it would make the R53 a better camera than the R1 at a much cheaper price.
bman212121 wrote:
I don't know of a good way to say that's basically just describing an R1. There isn't really a need for a new R5 to become something that already exists, unless you are hoping for a smaller body or the same features at a cheaper price point. An R6 3 might fit all of those same goals at that lower resolution. So it could potentially make more sense to use an R6 as a companion to an R1, or more likely you just need Canon to make an R1 that isn't lacking features versus their other bodies.
It does bring the up the point though of what will continue to be the feature differentiation. If every camera has similar AF, enough frame rate, enough resolution, then there isn't really much of a difference between models. The current stand out features of the 5 series are unmatched resolution and 8K video, neither of which are available on any other series. If the R5 were to pick up the requested things above it would make the R53 a better camera than the R1 at a much cheaper price....Show more →
Fair points but the OP's question asked for features we'd like to see in the next camera. And that's what I'd like to see. It's up to Canon to decide what is suitable for the 5 series.
That said, in 2-3 years, a lot can change with respect to what the competition offers. The R1 is already a bit of an oddball camera in its target market segment compared to the Sony a1II and Nikon Z9. So maybe the features in my wishlist better describe what the R1 Mark II could/should be.
I certainly can't argue with your logic! I think it is possible we'll see one of those features, so the question would be of those listed, which one would you find the most value in?
1) Improved AF system with faster & sticker response. Cross Type would be nice but doubtful
2) Faster readout
3) Improved High ISO noise. Better than the original R5
4) Better battery life
5) price tag of $2999 USD
I already know I'll be picking up the R5III so as long as they improve 1 thru 3, which will certainly happen.
It'll be a given for me and likely my last camera to ride off into the sunset with.
At least that's what I'm already tell my wife.
artsupreme wrote:
(1) Allow users to over-ride the video/photo switch with M-Fn button to allow a true hybrid shooter to switch back and forth without requiring a 3rd hand like the old R5.
This is my desire also. They allow you to do a one-button switch-over but you're locked into the settings pre-chosen, so there's no adjustments possible. I've also accidentally hit that Stills/Video switch and that never happened with my R5.
bman212121 wrote:
I certainly can't argue with your logic! I think it is possible we'll see one of those features, so the question would be of those listed, which one would you find the most value in?
Faster stacked sensor because it will improve responsiveness and overall AF performance.
The other point that would be very high on my list, if not at the top, (I can't believe I forgot to include it originally) and that is relevant for all current Canon cameras, is at least 2x buffer depth improvement.
goalerjones wrote:
This is my desire also. They allow you to do a one-button switch-over but you're locked into the settings pre-chosen, so there's no adjustments possible. I've also accidentally hit that Stills/Video switch and that never happened with my R5.
Yes, it seems Canon forgot there are many formats we shoot in, which reminds me now of something I mentioned previously here, that we need more Custom Function slots for video. I would say 7 slots at minimum now, plus one for M:
I haven’t shot the latest firmware in field with low angle and grass so perhaps it’s fixed. That is something that ai focus should be able to detect and address so I’m hopeful. If that is fixed, it mitigates the 5ghz issue for me.
Battery life is a real bummer in places like northern mn for owls in winter. I had to rig up taping hand warmers to battery grip to make the battery last enough for shooting.
dcisive wrote:
You can pretty much forget about Cross type focus sensor design as that's exclusive to the top of the line R1. Canon is famous for distinctions between their flagship and lower models. I find battery life just fine. Frankly considering how long I'd be outdoors in freezing temperatures the batteries will far outlast me. . I'm finding the tweak they did with firmware 1.1.1 sure did spark a nice fast locking of the focusing and it stays put on mine so I have no complaints.
. I'm finding the tweak they did with firmware 1.1.1 sure did spark a nice fast locking of the focusing and it stays put on mine so I have no complaints. 
