Kit. said:

And what % would you expect and why?

I mean, isn't it obvious that Canon (or Sony, or whoever else) doesn't do miracles?

Click to expand...

I'm just conveying that a product can be a mind-blowing leg up in specs for one person and an 'okay, so they finally caught up to us' to another.

- A

Sharlin said:

Indeed I'm half seriously wondering whether we're going to see memory cards with heatsinks that protrude from the slot. A battery grip that also functions as a heat sink seems like an idea that I'm sure has occurred to engineers as well

Click to expand...

Or even just attach a L-plate. That will substantially increase surface and will hopefully address the heat dissipation issue. Aluminium is not the greatest material from a heat conductivity point of view. But still..

TominNJ said:

I preordered after enough information became available that I was convinced it would be a significant step up from my 5D IV.

it will be my first EVF camera. I hope I don’t hate that part of it.

Click to expand...

For my use as a fashion photographer, I have found the EvF of the R to be perfectly fine except for when in direct sunlight. The screen doesn't have the dynamic range of the naked eye obviously so it is easy to lose track of the edge of the frame if it's in shadow

Neowise from the west of Austria, taken with the EOS R and 135 mm

I strongly suggest a visit to Optical Limits, where you will find, in "Industry News", an extremely interesting interview of Leica's optical genius, Peter Karbe.

jurci2 said:

Considering the fact that the TC's are white (and the 600/800 @f11 are not) we might expect tele lenses (with wide aperture) in a white lineup. Now the only white lens is the 100-500 that would be color-matching?

Click to expand...

Not exactly. The R bodies have a brushed silver mount ring as does the rear of the 100-500 for a perfect match. The TCs don’t have this color so don’t match either.

Excellent thanks for sharing those

unfocused said:

I really don't know that there is a definitive answer. There are people on both sides of the question that make statements with absolute certainty.

Click to expand...

Sure, both sides have written a lot. But I have yet to see an example for two images from comparable cameras (same sensor size, roughly same generation sensor) where a difference in resolution results in a differennce in noticeable noise when viewed at the same size.

I personally find demonstrations through images to be fairly definitive.

If you compare images from different resolution sensors at 1:1, you're a) going to see more noise in the higher res sensor and b) doing it wrong After all, the further you digitally zoom into an image, the more it's detail becomes apparent, along with the noise.

Kit. said:

The truth is: keepers from R5 will be noisier on average, because you will be able to crop more.

Click to expand...

That's only true, if you actually do crop more. If you don't, it doesn't hold. Then you just have a lot of high resolution keepers. But I guess the assumption is that you would go for 45 MP because you do in fact crop severely often (wildlife and so on), so then it makes sense.

Someone here (I believe it was here) posted that the 1DX3 test shots at DXO were originally 12 bit electronic shutter shots.

I don't believe DXO has formally acknowledged that, but it surely would explain the delta in results. See what e-shutter does to DR at PTP:



- A

Here is the file uploaded to CR.

bbb34 said:

I'm probably just confused. The function that Canon presented is inside DPP? And that is an off-camera application. My comment above was pointless.

Click to expand...

The article tells which of the functions can be performed in camera, and which are in DPP. The depth map imbedded in the raw allows DPP to make adjustments, and the processor in the camera is good enough to make some adjustments on the fly.

It all depends on your usage of the camera, if you take lots of photos and work on them later, or just a few and spend the time to get them optimized using in camera features. Nothing wrong with either or both.

We are done with the R5.

Now it's time for 5D5 and M5.2 rumors!

sierra201107 said:

So... 3'899 USD. My guess wasn't so bad for someone who "doesn't understand the market", eh? Turns out you don't need to be an expert in a particular market, basic understanding of marketing & supply and demand is quite enough.

Click to expand...

you said that anything over $3,500.00 would not make sense to you. are you trying to say now: I was wrong. The price mark is much higher than I was initially expecting... apologies for being childish..." Is that correct?

Kit Lens Jockey said:

I noticed the standard ISO range for the R6 goes one stop higher than the R5 (102400 on the R6, vs 51200 on the R5.) This makes sense because of the lower resolution and larger pixels.

But with just under half the resolution on the R6, at the risk of setting off a heated debate, is it fair to say that the high ISO noise performance between the two cameras will probably be pretty similar to one another for any photo viewed at a given size? I would think any higher amount of noise on the R5 will be negated by the fact that you are only looking at the photo at about half the scale of a photo from the R6 at any given size.

Click to expand...

My guess is you'd have a hard time telling the difference. We already know from IDX III testing that the 20 MP sensor is excellent and there's no reason to think the brand new 45MP sensor won't be very good as well. If I were choosing between the two, noise wouldn't be big factor for me. If you think you will be shooting a lot of very high ISO that might be a reason to go to the 20MP sensor but I'd have to be conviced you couldn't get the same result from sampling down the larger 45MP.

But, I've never even seen either camera so that's just my guess if it's any value to you. I think the highest ISO I've ever used "successfully" used was 10,000 and that was a 20 MP file from a 1DX Mark II.

Right now my country is open internally, but border is lock to F down. Thankfully our Govt did really well in moving early. But, I can't get the R6 until the border is reopened!

It's way cheaper to fly to Miami or NYC, buy gear and return with it in luggage, than paying the ridiculous duties and vat if I have it shipped.

Until borders are open I am going to have a permanent sour look on my face lol

Plan is
R6
RF 24-105 L f4
RF 85 f2
+Accessories

unbelievable thread.

AlanF said:

Cheaper than in the UK. Post-Brexit price gouging is beginning.

Click to expand...

Please also note differences in VAT. I've added this to the OP. But I still think you're right that net price is lower thank in the UK.

Brad-man if we ever meet, beers on me.

It seems like the R5 will have a built in OLPF, but will it be enough to not need a UV/IR Cut?

HenryL said:

it’s a 35mp for still frames extracted from video. The video frame width is 8192 same as stills, but it’s not as tall.

Click to expand...

Ah, that makes sense. Thanks.

LDS said:

I could be wrong, but it looks to me something alike the Hahnemühle 21x59 cm paper. That's why I was asking in my post if it supported bigger "panorama" formats than those based on A4 sizes.

Hope they also removed the very wide margin for matt papers - it made using the Hahnemühle Photo Rag 21x59 unusable on my Pro 10.

Click to expand...

Thanks

Gino_FOTO said:

If that price is right, Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 for RF look even more appealing to me.

Click to expand...

I am currently torn between that lens and the Tamron SP 85mm f/1.8. I will probably get the Tamron since I have started to do video again and it has IS (VC).

I can't wait to take better, faster photos of people wearing masks! Whooo hooooo!

Seriously, any thing reminding us of normal times is a blessing. Go Canon!

BeenThere said:

Is today the day that full specs leak?

Click to expand...

I'm impressed they have kept the lid on this for this long