The Canon EOS R5 Mark II is expected to be announced in early 2024, the logical time would be ahead of CP+ in February. There have been multiple reports that prototypes of the camera are in the hands of Canon's loyal test photographers, but the final feature set for the camera is not yet known.

We have been told that Canon plans to push the EOS R5 Mark II back to the top of its segment spec wise, for both stills and video features. One source has claimed that the EOS R5 Mark II will up its 8K framerate to 60fps in RAW. Will additional power or cooling be required to hit that frame rate? We're not sure.

We have seen a detailed patent for a Canon made external cooler for EOS R cameras. The illustrations seem to show an additional battery slot, so that could provide more power to the camera as well as power to the active cooling fan on the accessory.

Now, there have been various rumors about the resolution of the EOS R5 Mark II image sensors, we have heard both 45mp and 60mp image resolutions have been tested. At 60mp, there would need to be some kind of pixel binning for RAW shooting, so to a lot of people a 45mp sensor makes more sense from the technical side of things. While we trust the source that says “60mp is likely”, we still think 45mp will win out in the end, it just makes more sense. It also allows Canon to finally release a high-megapixel version down the line.

The same source also claims that 4K will get a “massive” framerate bump, the current EOS R5 offers 120fps, so to us, “massive” would mean 240fps. Which would be pretty amazing, and we see no reason why Canon couldn't do it. The days of being behind on specifications seem to be over for Canon.

Most details are obviously still vague about the EOS R5 Mark II, but we are starting to see a few more mentions about the camera, so it feels like the February 2024 announcement date is going to come to fruition.

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works.

Go to discussion...

58 comments

  1. Fewer MPIX? Not happening IMHO. 8K leaves me cold, but can see the competition coming out with some cool features. Let's kill rolling shutter for a start. Better high ISO would be nice as well.
    • 0
  2. Why not both. One aimed at stills and one hybrid. That said I hope Canon goes for 60 and spend a frikkin fortune on the CFA and resist the temptation to deliver clean images at ISO 5 million.

    I want those old color and hues from the 1Ds MarkIII. Give me a daylight camera :-)
    • 0
  3. I used 8k30 raw lite for the first time at 500@mm so I could crop in post for the moon rising over a viewpoint at Bondi beach … came out ok except for the drone flying illegally :-(
    Biggest issue was the bandwidth and even with lite mode, a 128gb card fills up in 11 minutes. 8k60 raw would be a huge data hog but if the sensor readout can support it then why not. No one will be doing long form interviews at 8k60 :-)

    If the HDMI port is upgraded to 2.1 then you can record raw externally and remove the cfe card heat source as an option for longer record times.
    • 0
  4. Dumb question by someone that doesn't know much about the underlying engineering: Why can't they offer 4K raw as well? I shoot in 8k raw a decent amount, and 4k60 All-I....but I always wish I could shoot it raw...is there some reason this can't be done as well?
    • 0
  5. Dumb question by someone that doesn't know much about the underlying engineering: Why can't they offer 4K raw as well? I shoot in 8k raw a decent amount, and 4k60 All-I....but I always wish I could shoot it raw...is there some reason this can't be done as well?
    You could do 4k RAW, but only cropped. RAW means you get the sensor pixels 1:1 represented in the output. If you'd take the full sensor and downscale it to 4k, it wouldn't be RAW anymore.

    If you mean 'better-than-h265' instead, then yes, that is technically possible, if Canon wants to license it, something like ProRES would be interesting.
    • 0
  6. I'm convinced 8k60 is pretty much a given at this point. The R5C showed that the sensor can handle it, but that the Digic X needed more juice than a LP-E6NH can supply. The R6II and R8 showed that the Digic X variant they are using only needs half the power compared to the R5/R6.

    So a current R5 with the Digic X from the R6II would very likely be capable of 8k60 with AF using just the LP-E6NH.

    Personally, I'd like to see all the improvements from the R6II show up in the R5II: tracking in all AF modes, auto subject detect, no 29:59 video limit, HF flicker reduction and FPS selection. And a much improved sensor readout speed. Without an improved rolling shutter, the R5II would be a hard pass for me. Even with improved speed it would be a hard sell, it's not the R5 that's holding back my photography :)
    • 0
  7. You could do 4k RAW, but only cropped. RAW means you get the sensor pixels 1:1 represented in the output. If you'd take the full sensor and downscale it to 4k, it wouldn't be RAW anymore.
    If it is to be a 60 MP sensor then it would shoot 9.5K RAW video.
    I could see cropped 8K 60 RAW also being a possibility.
    It is also shot 4K240 uncropped there would be few complaints about 8K60 being cropped.
    • 0
  8. I would be quite surprised if Canon kept the R5 pixel count.
    I'd expect 60 MP more likely. If not, I'd be very interested in the development step per pixel in the sensor.
    And how this performs in RL, esp. because of the crowd saying it has to be a stacked sensor.
    • 0
  9. Biggest issue was the bandwidth and even with lite mode, a 128gb card fills up in 11 minutes. 8k60 raw would be a huge data hog but if the sensor readout can support it then why not. No one will be doing long form interviews at 8k60 :)
    Can confirm based on using the Z9 at 8k/60 raw for wildlife photography. You need a super-fast and expensive CFX-B card. 1TB records 23 minutes of video, and that's just the start of the workflow problems. Long-term use of 8k/60 creates insane storage costs; remember you need off-site backups, too. Sending footage across the Internet to a video editor adds a day to your schedule. You'll need proxies for editing. Render times with grading and noise reduction (because it's raw) require real planning; 10 minutes of footage can easily take an hour to render.

    Of course, almost nobody actually uses 8k/60, raw or not. Most video is consumed on smartphones, and these cameras aren't the cinema cameras any filmmaker would use for big-screen productions. I think it's just pointless escalation of specs for the sake of competition.
    • 0
  10. Even with improved speed it would be a hard sell, it's not the R5 that's holding back my photography :)
    If I buy, it could be a triumph of GAS over need.
    • 0
  11. If it is to be a 60 MP sensor then it would shoot 9.5K RAW video.
    I could see cropped 8K 60 RAW also being a possibility.
    It is also shot 4K240 uncropped there would be few complaints about 8K60 being cropped.
    The Sony BURANO does record 6K compressed RAW internally downscaled from an 8K sensor.
    Considering the R5 II is supposed to offer multiple RAW resolution for stills (like A Sony A1), it is not impossible to see some downscaling for 8K RAW video as well.
    (Whether it is RAW or not RAW is another matter but again, the competition already uses that.)
    • 0
  12. I would be quite surprised if Canon kept the R5 pixel count.
    Wouldn't it be a "first" for Canon not to bump the resolution in their FF bodies? (I think there were several APS-C bodies with 18M resolution)
    • 0
  13. If I buy, it could be a triumph of GAS over need.
    That's how I feel as well (for my GAS, not for yours ), but I'm prepared to get wowed by the features Canon will put it that we weren't expecting.
    • 0
  14. Wouldn't it be a "first" for Canon not to bump the resolution in their FF bodies? (I think there were several APS-C bodies with 18M resolution)
    The 1DX ii and iii were both 20mp. Different sensors but same resolution. The 5Dii was 21mp and the 5Diii was 22mp which is pretty much the same.
    • 0
  15. I'd be pretty disappointed if it stayed at 45 to be honest. I wouldn't be shocked to see it happen given the desire for efficient 8k output, but it wouldn't be my first choice.
    • 0
  16. To me, 45 megapixel will be quite disappointing as Sony has A7r5 out for a while now, and I like to think that R5 line has also art photographers in mind who are always keen for higher megapixels.
    • 0

Leave a comment

Please log in to your forum account to comment