Canon releases financials and lays out advanced EOS R plans

[justaCanonuser]

The 30 minute limitation has never been a technical limitation. It's to do with avoiding taxes on products in certain regions that are considered "video" cameras. It seems that at 30 mins, any camera automagically becomes a video camera.

I agree. A limitation to avoid sensor overheating or other technical problems would be much shorter, like the 5 minutes for HD takes in the Nikon D90 ten years ago. 30 min is already a lot, in fact only very very few art house movies or art films ever had such long takes.

 

[justaCanonuser]

I look forward to see first reviews & sample images about the low light performance of the 20 MP R6. Could be the right camera for me, I seldom would need 45 MP. Looks like the R6 could be Canon's A7S...

 

[Baron_Karza]

I have a feeling the new R5 will be higher-priced then previous releases. I'm thinking this camera with anything near these specs will be $3999-$4500. Most of us will buy it at either of those prices. Of course I'd love for it to be cheaper but I have my doubts.

Don't give Canon any idea about people willing to pay such high prices. I've seen that happen to high end speaker parts (Martin Logan replacement speaker panels at about $3000!!)

 

[Baron_Karza]

I wouldn't pay more than $2500!!

 

[Baron_Karza]

 

[justaCanonuser]

Sounds like Canon really decided to raise from their laurels and DO something, before they lose too much shares of the camera market to Sony. Good to know for all who have invested a lot in Canon gear.

 

[justaCanonuser]

I wouldn't pay more than $2500!!

Canadian Dollars?

 

[jvillain]

Canadian Dollars?

The R is $4K in Canada so I am expecting the R5 to be in the $6k - $8k range. Canon HATES Canada. We never ever get the deals the rest of the world does.

 

[Deleted member 378085]

This new camera being 45MP kinda worries me. I bought a new MacBook Pro last year and it's plenty fast. But this new camera will have much larger files. Computer processing power is another by-product of this new camera. And for those wanting more than 45MP, I'd like to see what they're photographing. They must be printing billboards at 300dpi. Yikes.

unfortunitly the majority are never happy with any number of MP, yesterday they wanted 40, today they want 80, tomorrow they will be up in arms if its not alteast 100. There are many disadvanteages to cramming more and more photsites in the SAME AREA (35mm). Most dont care. More MP means faster shutter needed to freeze images, more noise, gigantic files, etc.

I personally am fine with 30mp, just want faster FPS, I am printing 40x30 300dpi prints that you can stick your nose against and see enormous detail. Like you mentioned, how big do these people want to print. An honeslty I bet you majority of them dont even print!!!
Most wont be able to tell you that 20MP can be printed at 40inches with extraordinary detail from a full frame sensor. I have seen huge prints from the 1dxii.

Sadly you have a generation that wants always more "k" video and always more megapixels stills. Who cares about 8k? 99% of the content on youtube is 1080p, why? cause working with 4k is a disaster of a process and space, workflow.

There is a generation that hasn't even mastered the camera they have and they think they need more to do what they dont need.

 

[Tony Bennett]

I have a 2013 iMac that handles 42MP Sony A7RIII files perfectly well so think we are WAY off the limits of any computer certainly release in the last five years.



Not directed at you in particular but a general observation, why does everyone who doesn't have a requirement for more resolutiion question the intentions of everyone who does like we're stupid? I don't question someone wanting 8K when 75% of all content is watched in HD on a tiny phone or tablet screen. Or the spec trend that a camera must have above 10 FPS before its usuable when people have managed for years with 5 FPS?

I see 45 MP on a APS sensor as approaching it's limits with current technology(noise, processor, buffer, etc.) Why wouldn't someone purchase a medium format camera to get more resolution? It's because they don't want to pay those prices.

I'm more concerned with data management and hard drives. My MBP screams.

I think it's more telling those that want a 80-100MP MILC are almost always the ones that say they won't pay above $$$(whatever price) for the camera. They always want something for nothing.

 

[Tony Bennett]

unfortunitly the majority are never happy with any number of MP, yesterday they wanted 40, today they want 80, tomorrow they will be up in arms if its not alteast 100. There are many disadvanteages to cramming more and more photsites in the SAME AREA (35mm). Most dont care. More MP means faster shutter needed to freeze images, more noise, gigantic files, etc.

I personally am fine with 30mp, just want faster FPS, I am printing 40x30 300dpi prints that you can stick your nose against and see enormous detail. Like you mentioned, how big do these people want to print. An honeslty I bet you majority of them dont even print!!!
Most wont be able to tell you that 20MP can be printed at 40inches with extraordinary detail from a full frame sensor. I have seen huge prints from the 1dxii.

Sadly you have a generation that wants always more "k" video and always more megapixels stills. Who cares about 8k? 99% of the content on youtube is 1080p, why? cause working with 4k is a disaster of a process and space, workflow.

There is a generation that hasn't even mastered the camera they have and they think they need more to do what they dont need.

Well said. Pixel density is a real thing.

 

[Deleted member 378085]

Well said. Pixel density is a real thing.

agreed!

 

[Deleted member 378085]

Yeah...I mean digital medium is out there and accessible now. I can't imagine a scenario that where 45 MP FX is not sufficient, and digital medium is not suitable. I get that people invest in systems but 45 MP is near the top of all FX resolutions (and 50 is still out there in Canon), and for something so specialized that it isn't enough, the medium gear is out there.

exactly, if these people want more mp, there is many cameras already on the market that provide it. To expect Canon to give you what you want is a bit self-serving.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

I made a business decision based on the hope of a high megapixel R on the horizon. Now I'm beginning to fear that Canon is turning their still cameras into video production cameras. While I do shoot video I'm not interested in 8k, what I want is a good high resolution still camera. My hopes are this is a bad rumor.

Actually when it comes to MILC, I’m fine with this approach. As I don’t do video, I thought like you for many years. However, with the new technology, I’m thinking there actually might be room for innovation on this front that may benefit stills shooters (such as ultra-fast frame rate captures).

 

[PureClassA]

What happened to the high mexga pixel EOS R? After all that rumor circulations, it's now just, gone?

Still 11 months left in the year.....

 

[Adelino]

With this new processing power I wonder if they will drop the 30 minute limit on videos?

Doesn't that have something to do with video camera tariffs or something like that?

 

[Gazwas]

I see 45 MP on a APS sensor as approaching it's limits with current technology(noise, processor, buffer, etc.) Why wouldn't someone purchase a medium format camera to get more resolution? It's because they don't want to pay those prices.

I'm more concerned with data management and hard drives. My MBP screams.

I think it's more telling those that want a 80-100MP MILC are almost always the ones that say they won't pay above $$$(whatever price) for the camera. They always want something for nothing.

I'm not a hipster or in any way considered young any longer (in my 40"s now). I was a Phase One customer and shot exclusivly MF but anyone who has been in that ecosystem for any length of time realises that the previous days of excellent trade in value towards the newer model has long since sailed and the MF market demographic is rental , big studio, heritage or being retired and once in the legal or medical professions.

I don't know anyone on here asking for more resolution and mentioning budget but plenty wanting all the new sensor tech in the R5 and not wanting it to cost over the usual 5D £3500 mark.

I hear what you say about storage issues with larger files but I think there are plenty of options on the market that doesn't have to cost the earth and a small price to pay in comparison to film and processing cost of the good old days.

 

[Joules]

The only downside to higher resolutions is file size and reduced framerates, for a given throughput.

The noticeable effects of higher resolutions decreasing dynamic range, increased motion blur or increasing noise are only observable if you don't view the images you're comparing at the same magnification. Viewed at the same magnification, a higher resolution image will be comparable or superior to a lower resolution one.

Higher resolutions allows for more freedom in editing due to the higher amount of information and cropping ability. That's true for video and stills. Output size doesn't matter, it's the flexibility gains that are attractive about higher resolutions.

If you are the kind of guy who nails their framing on each shot, great! Admirable skills. If you have the strength and budget to carry and own big whites with loads of reach, and have the skill and patience to approach any animal as close as you wish, wow! Good for you. If you are satisfied with what you have in your camera right now, or gear like Tele converters already satisfies all your desires, that's fantastic.

But if you think everybody else is just like you in those regards, maybe you should pay more attention to people's lives. They have their own properties and you won't gain anything from projecting yourself everywhere. You also won't gain much from putting people in boxes based on their age.

How the people who belittle those that are enthusiastic or thrilled about higher resolutions, or go as far as to call them selfish, is really weird to me.

 

[njohnson]

45MP is spot on for what I need in product photography. It's a middle compromise where the photos are still quite large to crop and provide space as needed while not being so large that the files are out of control. I can't imagine many scenarios where I'd need more than this.

I'm getting more excited but I"m sure the price will be high, especially the way the release was worded. I'd probably be in at $3000-3500 but I'd probably wait a bit longer any more than that.

I don't use stabilization much because the camera is on a stand but I'd welcome the addition of IBIS. The video features would be a bonus to me and give me more incentive to shoot more video.

 

[PureClassA]

Like bank robbers, they are now going where the money is, which is upper income, generally older, users. They are also aiming at new markets in Asia with rising disposable income. It's true they haven't unlocked the secret to younger consumers and that will become a problem over time as people like me are only one or two camera generations away from exiting the market.

Canon's emphasis on video may be one path to younger buyers. While iPhones can substitute for point and shoot cameras, they really don't do video as well as Apple would like you to believe. For folks like me, who aren't big users of the video features, these new R models may not be as appealing as they are to others, but the video-centric features are apparently essential to expanding the market.

Exactly! There is/has been a paradigm shift over the last decade. While the usage of phones has been slowly and steadily replacing the lower end camera market, the upper end for users who want to do photography are where Canon and others will stay focused.

I understand over the years we have seen in here the griping and sighing over video feature debates but that was/is a real and growing market Sony and others were afforded too much time by Canon to steal away and take a foothold in. The great news is that Canon is still the king dog in this world (marketshare) and it’s almost never too late for them to show up to the dance. They can sweep in and shank Sony if they want to and its looks like we are getting there in 2020. I mean how many Sony video people out there have said “I would rather have this feature set in Canon”. Answer? A sizable portion if not a majority.

I bought the EOS R last year because I wanted a good Canon 4K machine with the video features I needed plus a good replacement for my 5D3.

My primary work is still, Stills. But I want to do more video work because it pays well even for very simple projects.

Some folks in here have got to appreciate that while Video may not be important to them, it IS the fastest growing usage market for ILCs right now simply because those $1500-$3500 cameras CAN now do it at high performance, quality levels.