Re: Official Canon EOS R1 Images and Specifications
Pete73 wrote:
The only negative spec about the R1 seems to be the MP count. I've shot with a variety of cameras and believe 20-30 MP is the sweet spot considering noise, diffraction and file size. It's pretty easy to choke out my computer shooting the R5 at 20fps. Imagine trying to edit 45mp files at 40 FPS with pre-burst! I for one welcome the 24mp sensor.
I agree that on paper 24MP does not look good. In use, it really depends on one's needs. With this forum dominated by reach-limited bird/wildlife photographers, there's definitely an argument for higher pixel density.
For what I do, sports and events, 24MP is a good balance of resolution, file size, editing/processing ease and overall workflow but I wouldn't mind 30MP for a little more flexibility. Some other sports photographers I have spoken with about this and who have the R5II, do very much like its higher resolution and cropping flexibility. The opinion seems to generally be that they won't bother with the R1 because the R5II's AF is already a noticeable improvement (over the R5, and in their opinions, to some degree over the R3). But they're also all super-tele prime users (rather than zoom). Erring on the side of looser framing takes advantage of the extra resolution because of cropping rather than zooming. Another sports photo friend doesn't see the need to upgrade from the R3. His argument is that if he's already getting high 90% in-focus during a game, will the R1's higher performance make a real-world difference for him? I can definitely appreciate his point and I think it's one of the main challenges Canon has with marketing the R1. But none of them have used the R1. And that's why I think it'll be a 'user experience' matter more than anything else. All the high-end cameras on the market do a great job (and a reason I ended up with the R6II coming from the 1DXII, because it offered better AF) and the differentiation will be in how each camera produces the required results. Other than AF, I think the new pre-capture implementation in the R1 and R5II makes it another need/want feature over previous bodies like the R3 with its half-baked pre-capture and the R5, without the feature, IIRC. One of the things I fight with the R6II is its inherent mirrorless/EVF lag. I feel like I'm always a fraction of a second behind the actual action (it also has the previous generation half-baked pre-capture implementation). By the time I press the shutter release, the moment I wanted is often gone, which rarely happened with the 1DXII. After a couple years, I still haven't fully adjusted. With pre-capture you can wait a fraction of a second after the moment to decide whether or not you want it, and still get it. IMO it is in some respects a game changer. I felt like I was missing less with it on. And it is possible to regulate its use by how long you half-press the shutter release, if you're a BB AF user. But if you have AF on the shutter release and typically half-press well before anticipating the shot to give AF time to acquire and lock, then you'll be cranking out a lot of pre-capture frames with the current implementation that does not allow setting pre-capture duration.
Nov 04, 2024 at 05:37 PM
Previous versions of rscheffler's message #16678178 « Official Canon EOS R1 Images and Specifications »
