They were introduced at the same time. I can only see that happening again if they actually wait for a longer time period. I’d also guess Canon would like to create a hype/ good PR with each camera individually now, so they longer in the press focus.
You mix with a different crowd of wild life shooters than I do. I must also be an exception as I have owned the R5, R6 and R7 for wild life photography, and the R6 is my last choice for bird photography, though sometimes first for other things. But, maybe I am not in a minority as there are 179 pages of R5 images on FM, for mainly wild life, and only 21 for the R6. Also you must consider all my images as not acceptable as I nearly always crop. By the same reasoning, any image taken on a 7DII or other crop camera must be unacceptable as it is a crop of a full frame sensor with the same lens attached and pixel pitch.
Not all wildlife photography is birds, our experiences will, of course, be very different, that we are on a forum of any kind is the exception as it means we are incredibly geeky vs the billions of photos that go up to social media.
I find the 45mp R5 sensor a sweet spot. Although the Sony has more pixels, it needs to oversample to get to 8k video whereas the R5 is naturally that resolution and can provide raw (if needed). Anything above 45mp would need to handle 8k in my opinion so there is that to contend with and unless the next generation of Digic X is more efficient then Canon's bodies can't handle the oversampling heat effectively.
With my R5, it was an excuse to upgrade a 7 year old MBP and I have no issues with it. Consider using cRaw format if storage space is a concern.
You only need CFe type B for 8k30 raw and 4k120 (maybe 4k60). The heat generated is significant for sure.
The differences in cost between the faster/fastest USH-ii cards and CFe Type B cards isn't that much. The biggest difference is the cost of the slot hardware and the heat generated.
An interesting thought but we don't have any firm evidence to support it.
I agree about the Sony Tough cards. CFe cards are nice, hot and fast but I need to use my card reader whereas my MBP has a SD slot which is super simple. The only time I pull out my CFe card is recording 4k120 now.
I disagree. CFe card slots are expensive and hot and larger than SD card slots. More robust for sure but no need for them unless there is high res video recording involved.
in case of R7 its overall package that's lacking(low res viewfinder(sub $1000 cameras have that viewfinder), build quality, lack of batter grip option, non-BSI sensor, rolling shutter). In SLR days only options for shooting action were either 7(originally x0) or 1 series of bodies but these days even entry level R10 can out perform SLRs both in terms of fps and buffer depth.
CFxpress A might replace SD format if its adopted by manufacturers other than Sony. In case of SD its quite omnipresent in almost all sectors.
the Eiffel Tower night copyright story is correct but misleading in the sense that there has never been any enforcement of it except for commercial purposes.
I think that it is unlikely. Type A has capacity limitations that Type B doesn't. Sony was the only manufacturer until recently and (as far as I know) there are only 2 bodies that use them and they also take USH-ii cards. As far as I know, very few A1 shooters bother with CFe cards as the USH-ii cards are fast enough.
For now SDexpress seem to be DoA(just like UHS-III) with quite a few limitations on speeds(forced to UHS-I speeds when used in non SDexpress slots and when using non SDexpress cards in SDexpress slots). Even SD cards had limitations on max size which improved overtime, as of now Exascend has CFexpress A cards upto 240GB so since its introduction there already is improvement. Even the A1 shooters I know didnt bother with CFx as it is too expensive compared to fastest UHS-II SD cards. As I said success of CFx A depends on how well industry(other than ILC sector of camera industry) adopts this format.
