Canon EOS R5 Specifications
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Surely you do, or at least a range of distances. Whether you're hanging them on a wall, or looking at them in a book, you're viewing them from a certain distance, probably more than a few inches and less than a hundred feet
Upvote
0
I think a canon would not "shut down EF aggressively" but "bring up RF aggressively", which is vert different. I'd expect more an EF maintenance mode, i.e. just let it be what it is with minor tweaks if needed, rather than heavy back-porting of innovation. Just my 2cents.
I think we can all agree here that a 5Div is a perfectly fine tool for the years to come, just not latest and greatest.
Upvote
0
Agree on the current 5D4 being great, particularly for stills.
The question that each person who is looking to buy a new camera has to answer to himself or herself is can it meet my needs in the future? Will I miss out too much on the new RF glass that is here and coming soon or is the existing EF glass more than sufficient? Will I get into video or am I sticking to stills? Also, knowing that the EF line is on the down cycle, am I paying the right price for this camera or should I be getting a larger discount?
Upvote
0
Sure, but for every answer to your question that says 'bite the bullet and move to RF to future proof my world', there are takeaways. Consider a current 5D4 owner sizing up a move to an R5:
- Will EF really go away during the 4-5 years I will use this new body?
- Will I miss my OVF, the responsiveness, etc.?
- Will I go through a painful migration (to mirrorless and the control set in general) in a new R5 only to see a 5D5 come out with the same specs at some point?
- A
Upvote
0
As of now, I don't own a full frame of any type, and this looks like the one I want to start with. (Which at least eliminates the issue of whether to transition away from a 5D of some sort.)
Knowing I wanted to go full frame someday, I've avoided EF-S lenses (yes, I know they work on R mounts--but if that's what I have, what's the point of a full frame camera?) for the last year or so--but have bought EF lenses.
It'll just be a matter of the R5's price. I probably won't be one of the first-day buyers!
Knowing I wanted to go full frame someday, I've avoided EF-S lenses (yes, I know they work on R mounts--but if that's what I have, what's the point of a full frame camera?) for the last year or so--but have bought EF lenses.
It'll just be a matter of the R5's price. I probably won't be one of the first-day buyers!
Upvote
0
Actually, we are still trying to help you understand what dynamic range is.
I'm sure you would be surprised to learn that it's actually15 stops of DR you are talking about.
To be precise, log2((2¹⁴-1.5)/0.5) stops of DR.
Is it even a thing - downsampling in 14 bits?
The question is: if the DR at 45Mpix or 60Mpix resolution is important to you, how are you going to get it from a 30Mpix sensor?
If you convert it on a scanner with the resolution enough to resolve single silver grains (which are submicronic in size, so you will need a 100k+ DPI scanner), you will get a binary image. You can convert it into 8, 14, 16, 24, 32, 48, 64, or whatever number of bits per pixel you want, but it will be binary.
If you are scanning it with your usual 4.8k DPI scanner, you are using analog methods to downsample it.
Such digital 1-bit-per-pixel sensors are already proposed.
Upvote
0
I'm getting the impression the R6 isn't just a cheaper (somewhat less feature rich) version of the R5, but has a heavier emphasis on video.
I do shoot video from time to time...e.g., at a zoo, I take stills and if the animal is doing something interesting I'll try to capture it, but I'll probably never do anything remotely "professional" looking on video.
Nevertheless, it'll certainly be an option.
Upvote
0
The issue remains that at some point over the next several years, the economies of scale will take a foothold. If Canon is moving its focus to MILC going forward (seems clear they are) then continuing to produce new model EF lenses becomes self defeating. And continuing to produce large caches of existing models will be the same. Yes they have sold 100M units but the market is altering and they only have so much production capacity to go around. If they are going to slow down and then cease production of DSLRs over the next 5 years (certainly looks like they are with perhaps 1-2 exceptions like a 5D5), then it makes no sense investing in a bunch of new EF glass R&D and production. For what EF glass remains in use (a LOT) you can grab an RF adapter and slap it on your new RF camera.
So far as the M series, again, yes it's the best selling one. Right NOW. Again, any company has to allocate its limited R&D and production resources, not to mention Canon prefers to give customers as easy an upgrade path as possible. Therefore, as RF-S crop bodies come out in the next few years, don't be surprised to see the EFM models wound down as well. Why have two MILC Crop body eco-systems, when one of which has no upgrade capacity to higher level L glass? Why would Canon not prefer to have those M customers buy into new RF-S instead of EFM where they can buy (once Canon starts producing them) compact RF bodies similar in size to current M bodies with cheap RF-S glass and the ability to move UP into even more? Of course, IF Canon cant/wont make an RF-S body as compact as the M line now, different story, but I don't see why they couldn't get very similar sizes even with the RF mount being a bit bigger
The M system has an 18 mm flange distance (compared to 44 mm for EF and EF-S) and a 47 mm throat diameter. The RF mount's flange distance at 20 mm, and a throat diameter of 54mm (same as EF)
Will that 7mm throat difference and 2mm flange distance be enough to keep the EF-M? I don't know, but Seems unlikely. That's why I see eventually Canon phasing out the M. Again, economies of scale. If I'm Canon I would want to try and unify as much production as possible IF that unification can satisfy the entire range of products customers want to buy. Remember the M line was Canon's toying with the compact MILC market to offer a choice between that and the already popular Rebels (particularly the SL line). The new T8 and 90D may well be the last of their APS-C DSLRs too. 2-3 years from now, we will have crop RF bodies for the $500 range coming with kit 18-55mm RF-S glass that could easily replace the Rebel AND M lines
Upvote
0
Look to the R6 then. That is going to be one HELL of Full Frame camera for what may well turn out to be $1500 price range. My DX2 is the same 20MP and I use if for the bulk of my work. Coming up from where you are, I dont see the R5 being worth the extra (maybe) $2000. You would be much better off investing that $2000 in L glass. What lenses in EF do you have now?
Upvote
0
Yeah, I'm betting that R6 is gonna sell like crazy if comes in around $1500-$1800, which if they want to compete with the A7 line, then BANG. If they want to compete with the A7S line then they can stretch it up to closer to $2500+ provided they put some nice video features in there.
I think the 30MP EOS R is about the perfect balance for resolution and I really like mine, short of the 4k crop. 45MP for routine work is just overkill for me. I'd love to see an EOS R MkII with the same sensor size as now but with IBIS... but that ain't gonna happen ;-) We will have a choice of either 20 or 45 and then 100...
Upvote
0
The market for the 1DX3 is completely different. We want larger more durable workhorse machines that can basically run into hell and back and keep working. There's a lot more going on in that line than just the same sensor as the R6 or even the FPS. A 1DX everyday pro user is not going to look at the R6 and say "I'll just get that instead"
No worries, Canon knows what its doing ;-)
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
I don't understand why so many people get worked up at the suggestion that Canon's DSLR and R lines can coexist indefinitely. It's like people think there can only be one true god and everyone who believes otherwise is a heretic. It's not a religion, it's a business and businesses make what sells.
Maybe at some point in the future, the economics of making two different styles of cameras won't work. But they work now and the cost of continuing both formats is certainly less than the cost of developing a new format. Canon has already made the significant front-end investments to bring their mirrorless system to market. The cost of future improvements to both the R and DSLR lines are incremental now.
I like the R. I use it most of the time. But there are some things that DSLRs simply are better at than mirrorless. Maybe Canon will close that gap and when that happens, DLSRs might fade away. But, as a user of both formats, I have to say there are still a lot of advantages to DSLRs and I'm not optimistic that Canon can erase those differences in a single generation or two -- if ever. And, there are people who simply like DSLRs. Do you really think Canon is not going to go after those customers?
As far as the EOS lens line goes, one Canon executive has said they aren't currently planning new lenses. And, in that same statement he said that if customer demand is there, they will offer new lenses. The last several new EOS lenses have been modest generational tweaks. No reason on earth they wouldn't continue to do that if it means selling lenses.
Canon saw they were losing a chunk of the shrinking market to mirrorless, so they jumped into that market. They've never said they were transitioning from DSLRs to Mirrorless. They want to make the pie bigger, not force everyone to eat only apple pie even if some prefer peach pie.
Whatever Canon makes in the future, I'm going to evaluate it according to what meets my needs. If it's a DSLR, I may buy that. If it's mirrorless, I may buy that. I am allowed to own both and Canon is allowed to sell both. Get over it.
Maybe at some point in the future, the economics of making two different styles of cameras won't work. But they work now and the cost of continuing both formats is certainly less than the cost of developing a new format. Canon has already made the significant front-end investments to bring their mirrorless system to market. The cost of future improvements to both the R and DSLR lines are incremental now.
I like the R. I use it most of the time. But there are some things that DSLRs simply are better at than mirrorless. Maybe Canon will close that gap and when that happens, DLSRs might fade away. But, as a user of both formats, I have to say there are still a lot of advantages to DSLRs and I'm not optimistic that Canon can erase those differences in a single generation or two -- if ever. And, there are people who simply like DSLRs. Do you really think Canon is not going to go after those customers?
As far as the EOS lens line goes, one Canon executive has said they aren't currently planning new lenses. And, in that same statement he said that if customer demand is there, they will offer new lenses. The last several new EOS lenses have been modest generational tweaks. No reason on earth they wouldn't continue to do that if it means selling lenses.
Canon saw they were losing a chunk of the shrinking market to mirrorless, so they jumped into that market. They've never said they were transitioning from DSLRs to Mirrorless. They want to make the pie bigger, not force everyone to eat only apple pie even if some prefer peach pie.
Whatever Canon makes in the future, I'm going to evaluate it according to what meets my needs. If it's a DSLR, I may buy that. If it's mirrorless, I may buy that. I am allowed to own both and Canon is allowed to sell both. Get over it.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
