Two more EOS R bodies are coming in 2021 [CR2]

[davidhfe]

What is this 'interesting' notion that software, software design and testing, new hardware compatibility with said software, paying the software engineers paychecks etc etc etc.... doesn't cost anything? I read the canonnews article and thought there are some holes here. I'm sure Canon bean counters would love it to be 'free'.

Of course it's not free. But it's also only part of the equation. This is grossly oversimplified (and has been said 100x on these very forums!), but:

Figure out how much additional revenue those features will bring:
- Additional unit sales
- Additional accessory and lens sales
- Etc (any other customer lifetime value stuff)

Now add up all the associated costs of those features
- Additional hardware+firmware engineering
- Added part cost (mic pickup, etc)
- Added support costs
- Etc (codec licenses, etc)

All canon has to ask themselves now is: Do the costs of bringing these features outweigh the additional revenue? Literally every camera mfgr has had to run this cost/benefit, and literally every mfgr has decided the revenue wins, for the vast majority of their products.

 

[Architect1776]

Sensor resolution is only one metric out of many others to consider. according to your logic, if R5 was released with 40MP sensor , less than 45MP competition has to offer, do you think it would be “losing it”?

Whatever is needed for 8K FF, no.
The R5 stomps the a9 into oblivion.

 

[SUNDOG04]

There's a LOT of companies across many industries that have "halo" products....the ultra high end stuff, that most people can't afford, BUT...they are there to draw attention to the company's other products and it does help sell stuff.

Ford has had the GT40...and I think they're about to come out with it again.
Heck, Chevy has the Corvette ZR1
Dodge used to have the Viper....

Those are car examples (hey, who doesn't like a good car example?)......but you see the same thing in many other company's products.

YES, there are some people that buy them....some can afford as that what is a fortune to some, is pocket change to others.
Some save and save and get their dream item...
Others just *drool*.....or some just aren't interested in that stuff.

But call it bragging rights, or call it a halo products....most all company's have a top of the line "something"....and it helps the prestige of their whole line.

C

Each person is different. I am perfectly happy with my 174hp Civic. Doesn’t draw attention or get noticed. I like the low profile. For those with the attention getters, if that what makes you happy, fine, enjoy your product.

 

[SecureGSM]

Whatever is needed for 8K FF, no.
The R5 stomps the a9 into oblivion.

a9 being positioned as an action / sports camera competing with Canon 1 series cameras. Not 5 series. its all good though..

 

[usern4cr]

The people that were talking about an R1 in 2021 was I think the Nikkan had the article last September. So this isn't a "new idea".

The article states that prototypes were already tested .. and this is in September of 2019.

while the AF may be different - I would imagine that an R1 would have the same ergonomics as the 1DX Mark III - it would insanity to have otherwise. Canon has had the same 1 series ergonomics for basically all of 20+ years now. They aren't going to change from that because it's mirrorless.

and just to make mention - Canon was expecting to let loose with a TON of R5's during the games to professionals, so obviously they felt that even with the dramatic change in ergonomics from the 1 series and 5 series that they'd still have a lot of people using the cameras.

Also in the 1DX Mark III - AF cases, and AF operation for mirrorless is nearly the same as through the phase detect AF. So canon is already working on making a seamless professional transition to mirrorless with the 1DX Mark III.

and this is important. People that are used of the 1DX Mark III would most likely find the transition to an R1 to be pretty seamless because I would imagine the case situated AF that already exists in the 1dX Mark III would simply be there on the R1 with improvements for performance, accuracy,etc.

Thank you for posting this thoughtful, informed and well written reply that shows that not only is there the "possibility" of Canon having R1's in the hands of many of their professional photographers in the 2021 Olympics, but also shows evidence that it might even be "probable".

It is refreshing when replies can be presented in such a way as to show respect to those they may not agree with, instead of simply saying that they "don't have a clue for what they are saying".

Well done.

 

[Drcampbellicu]

it’s funny to see the reaction but it’s true

this forum has been
1. A bit too apologetic to canons failings over the past few years. Their products were falling behind
2. Dismissive of the technology advances that were coming elsewhere simply because cabin didn’t have products with them
3 it’s natural to love what you know but it’s been weird to see how rigid some folks have been. Eg autofocus. AI based AF is absolutely important and canon was behind with these tracking systems. Yet some forum users would say canon had the best AF but they just use single point AF.
I am a birder and scuba photographer. I understand that many forum users here want big bodies but there’s a large market for smaller bodies with good ergonomics. The R5 seems to be a step in that direction. I suspect canon sees a market for a body that size and when the forum users here actually use it they will transition. RF lenses will be smaller and balance better with these smaller bodies

just my 2 cents from watching this forum for years. I am very excited to see canons return to the technological forefront With class leading products.

cant wait

This is a rather biased account of what has been said on the forum for the past few years. Nobody made fun of IBIS, and most people accepted the tenet 'mirrorless is the future'. Some people questioned if IBIS was necessary given Canon's excellent in-lens IS, and especially reacted negatively to people coming here and saying if Canon did not add IBIS (and other features competing brands had) then they were doomed etc. As for the future being mirrorless, it was declared imminent at least ten years ago, but still hasn't come to pass. Most people were not saying never, but when? Certainly not until now, and probably not for a little while yet.

As for size, there are good reasons to favour bigger bodies. If you think 'mirrorless = small' and 'small = better' then you've neither considered the fundamentals of mirrorless much, nor do you do more than a subset of types of photography. Hint: big lenses don't balance well on tiny bodies (heat dissipation and battery size are other factors, though less so as time goes on).

 

[Architect1776]

a9 being positioned as an action / sports camera competing with Canon 1 series cameras. Not 5 series. its all good though..

The 5 shoots action better than the a9. If that is the Sony best action then the lower level Canon smokes the Sony best action camera.

 

[unfocused]

I agree with your logic for the bulk of the photos/photographers, but Canon has used its sponsored photographers to carry new gear on a second body at events like the super bowl etc. just so they can talk about it. I agree you won't see a majority in the photo pit, but it does provide a good chance to show it can do the job if you give it as a second to your explorers of light.

Oh, I agree with that. I fully expect that if a 1 series mirrorless is ready by the time the Summer Olympics finally take place Canon will be promoting the hell out of it. What I took issue with is the idea that Canon would be preparing an "R1" for actual day-to-day, event-to-event use by professional photographers tasked with covering the Olympics and that would somehow be driving the development timetable of the still mythical R1.

It's a rather subtle distinction, but the point is that those who think Canon is rushing to get an R1 body ready for use by professionals at the Olympics aren't thinking about the dynamics of the Olympics, which is a unique venue that carries high risk for photographers who are under pressure to get the shots. One of the reasons Canon released the 1Dx III when they did was so that photographers would have it in hand and be totally comfortable with it well in advance of the Olympics. And that's a line that photographers were already intimately familiar with.

In addition, people conveniently ignore the unique challenges that the RF mount presents. I've shot sports trying to use the R as a second body. While the adapter works flawlessly with EF glass, switching back and forth is a pain in the ass, as is carrying duplicate lenses for both mounts. This won't prevent Canon from heavily promoting the R1 when it is ready , whether at the Olympics or other venues, but it will seriously hamper the ultimate adoption of the RF mount for everyday use by professionals.

 

[AccipiterQ]

The 5r IS the high megapixel body. There's no 5dIV replacement in the r line yet

 

[Ozarker]

The 5r IS the high megapixel body.

nope

There's no 5dIV replacement in the r line yet

see 5R

 

[SecureGSM]

The 5 shoots action better than the a9. If that is the Sony best action then the lower level Canon smokes the Sony best action camera.

Uhm, you are still missing a few points.
1. A9 offers a blackout free continuous shooting
2. A9 offers an excellent subject tracking in Continuous shooting
3.A9 offers a very low latency EVF
4. A9 offers good battery life
5. A9 has been released back in May 2017 and R5 has not been released yet

it remains to be seen if Canon addressed the above points in R5
However, please note that Canon advised that R5 is not being positioned as a sport / action camera. Let’s be realistic here.

 

[Chris.Chapterten]

Uhm, you are still missing a few points.
1. A9 offers a blackout free continuous shooting
2. A9 offers an excellent subject tracking in Continuous shooting
3.A9 offers a very low latency EVF
4. A9 offers good battery life
5. A9 has been released back in May 2017 and R5 has not been released yet

it remains to be seen if Canon addressed the above points in R5
However, please note that Canon advised that R5 is not being positioned as a sport / action camera. Let’s be realistic here.

All very good points. We don't know how the R5 will handle action just yet...

 

[scyrene]

it’s funny to see the reaction but it’s true

To paraphrase Lisa Simpson, just because you say something is true, doesn't make it so.

this forum has been
1. A bit too apologetic to canons failings over the past few years. Their products were falling behind
2. Dismissive of the technology advances that were coming elsewhere simply because cabin didn’t have products with them
3 it’s natural to love what you know but it’s been weird to see how rigid some folks have been. Eg autofocus. AI based AF is absolutely important and canon was behind with these tracking systems. Yet some forum users would say canon had the best AF but they just use single point AF.
I am a birder and scuba photographer. I understand that many forum users here want big bodies but there’s a large market for smaller bodies with good ergonomics. The R5 seems to be a step in that direction. I suspect canon sees a market for a body that size and when the forum users here actually use it they will transition. RF lenses will be smaller and balance better with these smaller bodies

1. A matter of opinion; I disagree. As for 'falling behind' - that is once again a skewed interpretation. In some areas they were, in others they were ahead. But naturally the fans of other brands who came here only concentrated on the former. Not to mention, they were ahead in the one area that really matters to them, sales - there's no need to put all the bells and whistles into a product that is already selling well. That's no apologetics, it's just reality.
2. Perhaps; I think 'dismissive' is unfair, but to repeat - they were also patiently pointing out that Canon doesn't need to do everything every other brand is doing; that's not how business or technology works.
3. The AI AF thing has only blown up in the past year or two, as far as I can see. I don't recall anybody on the forum complaining about the 1Dx's AF compared to other brands'. But then I wonder how many pros are relying on AI AF, I suspect it's more important to enthusiasts. As for size, nobody denies there's a market - ironically seemingly a big one - for small bodies. But endlessly people have come here and told those of us who'd like cameras to retain their current ergonomics (with big lenses especially) that we're wrong, and that mirrorless means bodies must get smaller, and that smaller is intrinsically better. Incidentally, there's no size advantage for RF with telephoto lenses. They've managed to reduce the weight of the latest big whites, and when they release RF superteles I'm sure the same will be true, but this has nothing to do with the mount. Clearly if the biggest lenses get smaller (or at least lighter), smaller bodies will balance better. But asking for at least one bigger body isn't denying those who want smaller ones.

I think you're missing the broader point which is, most of what you perceieve as defensive or regressive has merely been a reaction to trolling - and a lot of it is genuinely that - for years about Canon's 'weaknesses', especially compared to Sony. When ten sockpuppet accounts pop up every year and spout the same claptrap, it's bound to lead to polarisation, but even then, mostly the reaction was patiently explaining how and why things are a bit more complex than e.g. 'IBIS is better, Canon NEEDS it NOW' etc etc.

 

[Drcampbellicu]

It seemed like there were more canon trolls on the forum than anything. The canon enthusiasts I know were not defensive about canon at all. They were unhappy with products that were lacking innovation for years. It started slowly but the last 2 years they got really upset about this. They wanted canon to do better so that they could have but a better product. Most of them have several L lenses like me which creates a barrier to switching. I think canon knows that our lens investment creates a barrier to users switching. That can lead to less customer centric behavior because the competition has to be so much better to entice folks to switch platforms.

this forum just didn’t reflect the mood I sensed anywhere in the real world. My safari group was concerned that canon was falling behind. My scuba groups were already dismissive of canon and their segmentation strategy. I can go on. But on this forum their was this hostility to the fact that canon had a brewing problem. I mostly saw canon trolls who seemed to say that everything canon made was fantastic. The 6d mark 2 was a disappointment and the R on its release was a unpolished recycled part product. The canon trolls will just say it’s all terrific and folks rush out and buy these substandard products at ridiculous prices. Canon built an amazing reputation for innovation a decade ago and that reputation helps fuels sales. But 1-2 years ago was a real low point. I am happy that I didn’t switch as I see canons upcoming products. Their new products show that we’re paying attention to where the market is going. I suspect that they fell behind on some technology and used their amazing brand strength to mitigate defections while they worked on new products.

but this forum over the past 2 years just seemed defensive. Canon is number one and anything that canon doesn’t offer is just stupid or niche. That’s why they don’t offer it!
That was the canon troll attitude here

To paraphrase Lisa Simpson, just because you say something is true, doesn't make it so.



1. A matter of opinion; I disagree. As for 'falling behind' - that is once again a skewed interpretation. In some areas they were, in others they were ahead. But naturally the fans of other brands who came here only concentrated on the former. Not to mention, they were ahead in the one area that really matters to them, sales - there's no need to put all the bells and whistles into a product that is already selling well. That's no apologetics, it's just reality.
2. Perhaps; I think 'dismissive' is unfair, but to repeat - they were also patiently pointing out that Canon doesn't need to do everything every other brand is doing; that's not how business or technology works.
3. The AI AF thing has only blown up in the past year or two, as far as I can see. I don't recall anybody on the forum complaining about the 1Dx's AF compared to other brands'. But then I wonder how many pros are relying on AI AF, I suspect it's more important to enthusiasts. As for size, nobody denies there's a market - ironically seemingly a big one - for small bodies. But endlessly people have come here and told those of us who'd like cameras to retain their current ergonomics (with big lenses especially) that we're wrong, and that mirrorless means bodies must get smaller, and that smaller is intrinsically better. Incidentally, there's no size advantage for RF with telephoto lenses. They've managed to reduce the weight of the latest big whites, and when they release RF superteles I'm sure the same will be true, but this has nothing to do with the mount. Clearly if the biggest lenses get smaller (or at least lighter), smaller bodies will balance better. But asking for at least one bigger body isn't denying those who want smaller ones.

I think you're missing the broader point which is, most of what you perceieve as defensive or regressive has merely been a reaction to trolling - and a lot of it is genuinely that - for years about Canon's 'weaknesses', especially compared to Sony. When ten sockpuppet accounts pop up every year and spout the same claptrap, it's bound to lead to polarisation, but even then, mostly the reaction was patiently explaining how and why things are a bit more complex than e.g. 'IBIS is better, Canon NEEDS it NOW' etc etc.

To paraphrase Lisa Simpson, just because you say something is true, doesn't make it so.



1. A matter of opinion; I disagree. As for 'falling behind' - that is once again a skewed interpretation. In some areas they were, in others they were ahead. But naturally the fans of other brands who came here only concentrated on the former. Not to mention, they were ahead in the one area that really matters to them, sales - there's no need to put all the bells and whistles into a product that is already selling well. That's no apologetics, it's just reality.
2. Perhaps; I think 'dismissive' is unfair, but to repeat - they were also patiently pointing out that Canon doesn't need to do everything every other brand is doing; that's not how business or technology works.
3. The AI AF thing has only blown up in the past year or two, as far as I can see. I don't recall anybody on the forum complaining about the 1Dx's AF compared to other brands'. But then I wonder how many pros are relying on AI AF, I suspect it's more important to enthusiasts. As for size, nobody denies there's a market - ironically seemingly a big one - for small bodies. But endlessly people have come here and told those of us who'd like cameras to retain their current ergonomics (with big lenses especially) that we're wrong, and that mirrorless means bodies must get smaller, and that smaller is intrinsically better. Incidentally, there's no size advantage for RF with telephoto lenses. They've managed to reduce the weight of the latest big whites, and when they release RF superteles I'm sure the same will be true, but this has nothing to do with the mount. Clearly if the biggest lenses get smaller (or at least lighter), smaller bodies will balance better. But asking for at least one bigger body isn't denying those who want smaller ones.

I think you're missing the broader point which is, most of what you perceieve as defensive or regressive has merely been a reaction to trolling - and a lot of it is genuinely that - for years about Canon's 'weaknesses', especially compared to Sony. When ten sockpuppet accounts pop up every year and spout the same claptrap, it's bound to lead to polarisation, but even then, mostly the reaction was patiently explaining how and why things are a bit more complex than e.g. 'IBIS is better, Canon NEEDS it NOW' etc etc.

 

[SecureGSM]

It seemed like there were more canon trolls on the forum than anything. The canon enthusiasts I know were not defensive about canon at all. They were unhappy with products that were lacking innovation for years. It started slowly but the last 2 years they got really upset about this. They wanted canon to do better so that they could have but a better product. Most of them have several L lenses like me which creates a barrier to switching. I think canon knows that our lens investment creates a barrier to users switching. That can lead to less customer centric behavior because the competition has to be so much better to entice folks to switch platforms.

this forum just didn’t reflect the mood I sensed anywhere in the real world. My safari group was concerned that canon was falling behind. My scuba groups were already dismissive of canon and their segmentation strategy. I can go on. But on this forum their was this hostility to the fact that canon had a brewing problem. I mostly saw canon trolls who seemed to say that everything canon made was fantastic. The 6d mark 2 was a disappointment and the R on its release was a unpolished recycled part product. The canon trolls will just say it’s all terrific and folks rush out and buy these substandard products at ridiculous prices. Canon built an amazing reputation for innovation a decade ago and that reputation helps fuels sales. But 1-2 years ago was a real low point. I am happy that I didn’t switch as I see canons upcoming products. Their new products show that we’re paying attention to where the market is going. I suspect that they fell behind on some technology and used their amazing brand strength to mitigate defections while they worked on new products.

but this forum over the past 2 years just seemed defensive. Canon is number one and anything that canon doesn’t offer is just stupid or niche. That’s why they don’t offer it!
That was the canon troll attitude here

++++ It seemed like there were more canon trolls on the forum than anything.

A.M.: this is a Canon centric internet resource. Majority of forum regulars are Canon enthusiasts and supporters. Not trolls. Trolls aren’t helpful. Majority of forum members are Tremendously helpful. Are you?

 

[BillB]

but this forum over the past 2 years just seemed defensive. Canon is number one and anything that canon doesn’t offer is just stupid or niche. That’s why they don’t offer it!
That was the canon troll attitude here

So you have your notions and others have theirs. You were disappointed in recent Canon offerings, others not so much. As I remember it, most of what you call trolling consisted of persons disagreeing with what somebody else previously posted. To me that is not trolling.

 

[Drcampbellicu]

Didn’t categorize the users as trolls. And I understand that you don’t see my view as helpful
Why?

++++ It seemed like there were more canon trolls on the forum than anything.

A.M.: this is a Canon centric internet resource. Majority of forum regulars are Canon enthusiasts and supporters. Not trolls. Trolls aren’t helpful. Majority of forum members are Tremendously helpful. Are you?

 

[Drcampbellicu]

Fair
But over the last 2 years I would notice that when anyone posted a grievance or concern about canon that 20 or so folks would just start attacking them. Many of the canon grievances or concerns where pretty mainstream concerns IMO.

So it made me wonder. Is this forum a canon is the greatest echo chamber?
It’s easier to talk about it now because I think most would agree that canon is in a much better position 2020 with exciting products. 2 years ago I don’t think that excitement was there...there was some concern or head scratching

So you have your notions and others have theirs. You were disappointed in recent Canon offerings, others not so much. As I remember it, most of what you call trolling consisted of persons disagreeing with what somebody else previously posted. To me that is not trolling.

 

[joestopper]

Regarding the comments concerning a sports-oriented mirrorless body for the Olympics rescheduled to 2021, it has to be borne in mind that there's still an element of doubt about whether these games will take place at all.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...reliant-on-covid-19-vaccine-senior-ioc-member
And, even more pessimistic:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...unlikely-to-happen-in-2021-virus-experts-warn

As a Japanese company, Canon will be very aware of this situation and of the fact that the Japanese had originally wanted to carry on regardless in 2020, then had to postpone, and that, more recently, having thought they'd got the virus under control, Japan has suffered something of a second wave.

If the sports-oriented body is already in development and planned for 2021 release, then the possibility of an Olympics in 2021 is well and good. If, however, the sports-oriented body is no more than an idea, I can't see that Canon would want to do a rushed job to produce a camera for an Olympics which might not happen.

Canon had never built a major product for a specific event. While it would be an additional benefit to introduce a new product at such an event, it is by no means driven by it. Life and work is more than just Olympics. There are tens of thousands of professionals out there who embrace the newest high-end mirrorles - regardless of Olympics. And Canon knows that. And that is why they will release it as soon as they have a product together that will meet expections of a 1-eries. Olympics or not.

 

[Architect1776]

Uhm, you are still missing a few points.
1. A9 offers a blackout free continuous shooting
2. A9 offers an excellent subject tracking in Continuous shooting
3.A9 offers a very low latency EVF
4. A9 offers good battery life
5. A9 has been released back in May 2017 and R5 has not been released yet

it remains to be seen if Canon addressed the above points in R5
However, please note that Canon advised that R5 is not being positioned as a sport / action camera. Let’s be realistic here.

And your point?
It is very old as it was not any real upgrade from the I version.
1DX MIII goes 20 fps as well
NO latency in the viewfinder.
much better battery life
Far more rugged build
Infinitely more native lenses.