Canon announces development of the EOS R5 full-frame mirrorless camera

[Michael Clark]

I carry manuals for all of my Canon gear on PDFs on my iPad.

I used to carry the paper manuals in my bag! Then they started getting to be thicker than 150-200 pages before they stopped printing them altogether.

 

[slclick]

You and me both. Lee 100 for me as well, though I don't use it nearly as much as I should.

But that lens does everything I ask of it. A perfect travel/hiking companion as well -- light, IS, sealed, front filterable, etc.

I feel the exact same way. Never hesitate to bring it along under any conditions or bag weight thoughts. Pair this up with HiTech Formatt filters and it's very special, especially considering the cost. I have had a couple wide Zeiss lenses before and while the color and contrast was very special, the distortion and other aberrations never made them worth the price of being in Club Zeiss. This one's a keeper.

 

[Sharlin]

I feel like motion jpeg is unlikely just because I wonder if 8k mjpeg would require more data throughput than a card could receive. That's why I also wonder if it will use SD UHS II cards - I don't know what the max write speed is to them right now, but I wonder if 8k is going to outrun it's capacity and need a cfexpress just to handle 8k at all.

8K30p RAW requires the same bandwidth as the 1Dx3’s 5.5K60p RAW, which is doable with CFExpress but certainly not any SD card. MJPEG would be quite a bit lighter-weight, bandwidth-wise, and if the body can encode 45MP JPEG stills at 20fps, it might also be able to encode 33MP JPEG movie frames at 30fps. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the R5 8K is going to be RAW-only, CFExpress-only (and additionally will melt the card when recording over 10 minutes at a time).

 

[Michael Clark]

You only have to take pictures of young girls.

That all depends on whether you want to take pictures of pretty girls on a system of exchanging services or of women who can afford to pay you for a well done portrait.

 

[Michael Clark]

Yes, and that effect is necessarily used in most zoom lenses, otherwise they would be very dark zoomed in.

BUT, the apparent aperture can physically not be larger than the frontmost element, because that one uniquely determines how much light gets in. There’s no way around it, you can’t multiply the number of photons after they’re already in (without photomultiplier electronics that is).

It is possible for an entrance pupil to be larger than the front element, but not by very much with telephoto lenses.

Wide aperture lenses that demonstrate "cat's eye" bokeh do so because the entrance pupil is larger than the front element diameter when the aperture is wide open, and thus off axis light is blocked from being able to "see" the entire entrance pupil.

 

[BillB]

It´s the Hype.....We waited so much for this one, now we are anxious....At least I am!! I have payed more attention to Canon release and yes, they do State they will deliver 8k video recording. This is my dream camera!







We have to wait a bit longer to dissipate doubts.... I don´t care if only 8k is mjpeg if all the other formats are H.265! Well....let´s wait to see! Damn, July is sooo far away!

At this point, I don't think we have much idea about when we we will have more information on R5 specs or when the camera will be available.

 

[Rule556]

The EF 135mm f/2 L isn't just about how sharp it is or isn't. It's also about how good the out of focus areas look. There's still no other 135mm lens on the market that has as smooth OOF areas as the 135L.

Lenses today are sacrificed at the altar of the Gods of The Flat Test Chart, because that's all most anyone looks at when comparing lenses. The flat field correction needed to get the edges of a chart as sharp as possible while the lens is at best focus for the center of the chart also make the out of focus areas less pleasing.

I've been shooting with an EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II since 2010. It's a great tool for a lot of things, and I've probably taken more frames with it than any other lens I've ever owned, if for no other reason than sports and action shoots tend to be high-numbers-of-frames affairs. But if I know I can get away with only 135mm instead of needing more of the zoom's range, I always reach for the 135L.

Every.Single.Time.

To veer off topic a bit, the thing I’m most excited about, as an amateur enthusiast, with the RF system, is the lowering of prices in the used EF market. I can’t justify the RF trinity, but I should be able to build a stable of used EF glass that I wouldn’t otherwise be able to justify. I’ll definitely be looking for one of these on the used market.

I bought the R, even though I knew it was likely a flawed first try, to be able to take advantage of both lens lines. The fact that the camera is monumentally better than my 6D was just icing on the cake. Won’t be upgrading this body for at least five years, and I’m stoked to use it.

 

[BillB]

I was really wishing the R5 was coming with personal buttons for ISO, drive, flash....that is what I miss a lot coming from 5D series. It's a pain go into M-fn button on an event and find what you need.

If it is like the 5DIV you will be able to set the back screen to get to the controls pretty fast

 

[Michael Clark]

To veer off topic a bit, the thing I’m most excited about, as an amateur enthusiast, with the RF system, is the lowering of prices in the used EF market. I can’t justify the RF trinity, but I should be able to build a stable of used EF glass that I wouldn’t otherwise be able to justify. I’ll definitely be looking for one of these on the used market.

I bought the R, even though I knew it was likely a flawed first try, to be able to take advantage of both lens lines. The fact that the camera is monumentally better than my 6D was just icing on the cake. Won’t be upgrading this body for at least five years, and I’m stoked to use it.

The EF 135mm f/2 L is a harder lens the find on the used market than many others. Not too many who have them are willing to let them go unless they are a "below average" copy.

 

[Architect1776]

Continue reading...

Bottom line this camera sets a whole new standard as Canon always does and leaves the rest wondering what hit them. They will eventually catch up but then again Canon in their own time after the doom sayers say Canon is doomed, will drop another nuke on the industry. They are still way ahead in compatibility with the R. ALL EF/EFs lenses 100% compatible, NO one else can say this and now ALL your FD, FL R and L39 Canon lenses will easily work with no glass in the adapter. Also many other brands including the Nikon F mount so that will bring all the Nikon F mount users to Canon as well just to access the R5 and other future cameras by Canon.

 

[Michael Clark]

There’s no official word as of yet, but the way they protrude into the lens makes them almost certainly mechanically unusable with any lens with a short backfocus distance.

How far in front of the flange is the reamost element on the RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS at its most rearward movement?

 

[Architect1776]

A price of $4,000 for the R5 would betray the R5 moniker that strongly indicates it's intended to be the RF equivalent of the 5D series DSLRs. Those have consistently been in the $3,299-$3,499 range, with the exception of the 5DS, which was a niche specialization that shared the same body but was aimed at a different market segment.

While features are certainly related to price, the floor and ceiling of price ranges are primarily determined by product positioning relative to its intended market. It's possible that Canon is rearranging its market segmentation and product positioning, but highly unlikely with the R5 moniker. I see that as a clear message to 5D shooters that a mirrorless body is in the works for them.

If anything, the global contraction in ILC camera sales, coupled with Canon's statement that it will aggressively win marketshare in the full-frame mirrorless space would point to:

• More features at historically consistent prices for a given segment, or
• Lower prices for a modest (generationally appropriate) boost in features, or
• A combination of both.

While I think a launch price of $3,499 for this feature-packed R5 seems most likely to me, I would not be surprised one bit if Canon launched the R5 at $3,299.
In a contracting market, raising prices doesn't win you marketshare, and saying, "But it has a whole slew of redical features to support the higher price!" doesn't mean the target market has (or will spend) the money to buy it.

Totally agree.
Canon can easily bring this R5 in at $3,200 or so and sell the crap out of it with the superior lens line-up they have and with the full EF/EFs compatibility and able to use All FD, FL, R and L39 Canon lenses now as well as all the Nikon F mount lenses this camera will appeal to a huge market at the right price. Like the 5D MII did.

 

[StoicalEtcher]

I wouldn't bet too much money on a comparable 5DV anytime soon. This is the camera they need(ed) to make to persuade 5DIV users to switch to mirrorless so there's no need to offer a mirrored alternative too quickly.

I know what you mean.....but, I suspect there are at least a number of 5D users who like the ergonomics / size of the existing model too much to change to something that looks (at least) to be somewhat smaller, so, I don't know, ... (But then again, I am biased,as I am waiting on the 5Dv to upgrade to )

 

[StoicalEtcher]

Let's Talk about the SHORTCOMINGS OF THE CANON EOS R5 : ( as compared to 5D4,Panasonic S1H,A7R4,Z7 )


1. No dedicated buttons for Mode dial , button for switching between photo & video mode, ( in the 360 render of the R5 camera cannot locate either a dedicated ISO button or AF drive button ). It has less buttons overall as compared to 5D4. Thumbs down

2. Megapixels : R5 will possibly have 40 megapixels (which is very less in 2020, at least 45 Mpx is a must) ...Nikon released D850 in 2017 with 45 Mpx , now Z7 in 2019 with 46 mpx, A7r4 can do 61 mpx. Canon doesn't have the DR of the Sony's & Nikons. So R5 lags behind the competition in photo specs.

3. Possibly the R5 will not have 10 bit internal video like S1H , or record externally 10 bit like Nikon z7, z6. S1H leads in video specs hands down.So R5 lags in video specs as well.

4. Possibly No anamorphic lens support like S1H. R5 lags

5. S1H can do dual ISO for cleaner video at higher ISO. R5 lags here too.

6. S1H is NETFLIX approved & imho R5 won't have those specs for NETFLIX approval. R5 lags.

6. can't do ISO 32 & ISO 64 like the Nikon Z7 when you want shallower depth of field in bright light.

7. Canon has not talked about the battery life..in all probability it will take fewer shots per battery charge as compared to Canon 5D4.

8. so the ONLY saving grace that Canon marketing found for this camera was that to give it 8K !!! ))
if you take out the 8K from the equation what does R5 have that the competition doesn't already offer???

Further, imho that 8K will come with at least a 2x crop & 8 bit 4.2.0 codec. So basically that will be a gimmick ...not for Pro's. Not sure whether the 4K will be with crop of Full frame either. Also possibly no live AF tracking in 4K or 8K modes. Canon has NOT revealed anything on the codecs. is it 8bit? or 10 bit? or has 12bit Raw like C200. Internal 10 bit in 4K is a must in 2020. what about RAW video codec ?? it doesn't seem to have. RAW lite a must for video in 2020.

Canon is solidly lagging behind the competition by at least 2 years in Mirrorless...it is releasing cameras with specs which the competition already released in 2017 on wards.

So do u think R5 is the ONE which will destroy the competition in 2020 ???

Oh wow, Sorry, but I think you may have found your way onto a Canon site in error - Google should be able to redirect you to one on Sony..
Check back in a month or so though, when we actually know a bit more about the R5.
Good luck.

 

[Starting out EOS R]

I feel you. The R5 will be an awesome system, but I don't think the R5 will be for me personally.
I can't afford $3500 for a body, and then have enough to purchase lenses, memory cards and other peripherals, I just wont have enough money to get up and running.

I have my fingers crossed for the R6 in the ballpark of $2000. If the R6 comes with IBIS, uncropped 4k, HD120 and dual card slots, I am all in.

I don't need 8k, I don't even have a machine that can deal with that edit. I don't need 20fps as well, would be nice, but not a deal breaker. The only way I can see myself spending a bit more on the R6 like around $2500 or R5 around $3500 is if somehow they allow 4:2:2 10bit internal. My kids can eat bread and cheese for a couple months.

But those are my needs, I understand everyone needs maybe different. Honestly the Sony A7III fits my needs perfectly at the moment, but I just don't like the E-mount going forward. It really limits them on what they can achieve with their lenses and IBIS. I just need Canon to deliver their version of an A7III with RF mount lol

Sounds excellent logic to me. Im fortunate as I have the RF 24-105MM L and love that lens. The 70-200mm sounds great and I tried it but just cant justify the £2700 price tag not being a Pro. Just have to wait and see what develops.

 

[David_E]

...You see, not everyone just reads the spec list. Each photographer will have some items that they care more about than others. And - perhaps more importantly, having specs does not mean the specs are worth having if they don't function well.

...So, no need to weep for me. I purchased an excellent camera.

Bingo! I have little regard for numbers and I do not suffer from camera envy. Frankly, there probably isn’t a camera on the market that I couldn’t easily afford, at least as far up the scale as Phase One. I chose the RP for general nature photography and arthropod macrophotography because I liked the old-fashioned controls and light weight. I, too, purchased an excellent camera for my purposes.

As to the R5, my purchase decision will depend on its focus-tracking ability. I need to do more with insects in flight.

Epargyreus clarus, silver-spotted skipper. Canon EOS RP, EF100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM

 

[sanj]

Jarred is unsure if 8k will be cropped or not. Hi Jarred!

 

[sanj]

She also is unsure if 8k will be cropped. Hmmm. How can the math that was told to me earlier be wrong??

 

[sanj]

For me. 4k uncropped at 24/30 fps is enough. If RAW, DPAF is there SUPERB!!!

 

[joestopper]

The magnification between the front of a lens and the physical diaphragm is the only reason an 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 is not an 18-55mm f/3.5-11, a 70-300mm f/4-5.6 is not a 70-300mm f/4-17, or a 70-200mm f/2.8 is not a 70-200mm f/2.8-8.

The "effective aperture" is the entrance pupil as viewed by the subject (i.e. from the front of the lens). With narrow angle lenses (telephoto lenses), the front element must be at least as large as the entrance pupil because the light it is focusing is almost collimated. With wider angle lenses, the entrance pupil can actually be larger than the diameter of the front element when viewed from a point on the len's center axis, though that causes severe vignetting and "cat's eye" bokeh for objects in the periphery. To keep the entire entrance pupil visible from the entire field of view is why many wide angle lenses have those bulbous front elements that are much larger than the e.p.

When light is refracted by a converging lens, the field density increases in proportion to the magnification, just as the cross sectional area through which the light passes decreases in proportion to the magnification. With a simple thin lens, there is a point halfway between the lens and the point of focus where all light passing through the lens passes through a single point where the two cones of light meet at their tips. That's why the image projected on the film/sensor is inverted.

Mixing up several things:
The discussion started from a *prime* lens and not a zoom. And I stated, the front lens element must be at least the size of the aperture.in a meaningful design. And that is true (and not a contradiction to your statements regarding a zoom).
However, if you do magnify in front of the aperture then the t-stop is quite different from the f-stop value. While that can be the case for a zoom at some focal length, it makes no sense for a prime.
Proof: Check f-stop and t-stop values for various primes and you will see they are very close (and the reason why t-stop value is always a bit worse than f-stop value, is the loss of transmission through glass).