Are two cameras going to replace the Canon EOS R5? [CR]

[EOS 4 Life]

I still hope they will sooner or later find a practical way to put two or more sensors into the same camera. Having to buy and carry two cameras just because of the different sensors is very annoying.

That is the holy grail.
Cameras would be truly like film cameras if we could swap out image sensors in the field,
The image processor would then be the defining characteristic of the camera.

 

[David - Sydney]

R6 III.
The R6 is already a cheaper R5.

True but Canon is keeping the R with 30mp in the lineup. Not sure why but it does meet the mp mid-point between 24.3mp and 45mp and is cheaper again. Current B&H pricing:
R6ii USD2.5k
R6 USD2k
R USD1.4k

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I´d guess, in order to accomplish that one would need the ability to actually move the sensors around in the housing of the camera. With all the electronics connected and IBIS as well, that seems like it is physically impossible. At best, it would be extremely easy to break such an application and it wouldn't be a sturdy camera at all.

Cameras with digital backs can do precisely that.

 

[David - Sydney]

Sony is getting 50 MP at 30 FPS with the slower CF express type B*.
Canon RAW files are a lot smaller than the Sony ones.

*I do realize that there are a lot of caveats and it is more like 20 FPS in the real world.

What size are the Sony files? I thought that Sony always had some level of lossy compression in the raw files and only recently provided a lossless raw but I could be wrong.

Small clarification, Sony uses CFe Type A cards which have only one PCIe channel vs 2 on Type B cards.

Nice to have dual UHS-ii/SD card and CFe Type A card slots but using the CFe A cards only helps with clearing the buffer as the max video bit rate is compressed and can be handled by the UHS-ii cards that are >250Mb/s write speeds. CFe Type are expensive and small capacity and are likely (IMHO) to go the way of memory sticks.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

For me, 45mp is a sweet spot

Before the R5 people said 24 MP was a sweet spot.
Now the R3 is "crippled" with only 24 MP.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

What size are the Sony files? I thought that Sony always had some level of lossy compression in the raw files and only recently provided a lossless raw but I could be wrong.

Sony has completely uncompressed RAW, lossless compressed RAW, and lossy compressed RAW.

 

[David - Sydney]

Before the R5 people said 24 MP was a sweet spot.
Now the R3 is "crippled" with only 24 MP.

I am not sure who "people" are but I was happy to move from 18mp with the 7D to 5Diii to 5Div and R5. Maybe 30mp was the sweet spot before the R5 although Nikon had 42mp at the same time. I am a pretty happy camper and don't feel the need for additional pixels for a long time.

Computer bandwidth / power was also a limitation but less so today so mp and computers needed to be more in lock step to support higher resolution sensors and frame rates.

The R3's 24.1mp sensor is a simple reflection of the needs of 1 series users... which haven't changed substantively in a very long time.
The A1/Z9 flagships show that higher frame rates and higher mp are not necessarily independent so I believe that the R1 will need to be similar to be considered a "flagship"

 

[1 Fan]

The R5 is very good in my use. I will keep using it for some time. Have anybody heard of the rumered RF 24-105 MM f/2.8? I am waiting patiently for Canon to bring it to the market.

 

[David - Sydney]

The R5 is very good in my use. I will keep using it for some time. Have anybody heard of the rumered RF 24-105 MM f/2.8? I am waiting patiently for Canon to bring it to the market.

I don't think that there has been any precedence to have such a lens from Canon. 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 are the standard focal ranges with 24-105/4 being the "walk around" standard focal range.
<edit: CR1 rumour from March>

Canon surprised most of us with a 28-70/2 which has rave reviews if you are strong enough to wield the beast!
Of course it lead to some users pleading for a 70-135/2

 

[davidespinosa]

@David - Sydney

https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/is-a-canon-rf-24-105mm-f-2-8l-is-on-the-way-cr1.42181/

Of course, it's CR1...

 

[unfocused]

As an aside I just want to say that in my opinion CRaw is one of the best innovations ever. Virtually all reviewers have said, and my own experience reflects, that there is little to no penalty for using compressed raw. As sensor resolution keeps moving up, I expect it will become the default choice for most users and I also expect Canon will continue to improve on it, making further compression possible.

 

[Dragon]

I don't get it, how some more or less slightly different camera types is a good thing in a shrinking market. We have already R3 and R8 as numbers, which we never had in the best DSLR time. (1D,5D,5DSR,6D (7D))


45MP is the way for 8K video, so a replacement with 60 or what megapixels has a crop or something a videographer not want....

Sometimes in a shrinkng market, the best strategy to gain share is to offer more choices so every buyer can get as close to exactly what he wants as possible, particularly if you can pull that of with minimal added manufacturing cost.

 

[shadowsports]

Just like Meike is releasing an RF 85 f1.4.... meanwhile, nothing announcement wise from Canon, nothing from Meike and this lens wasn't at NAB.

"Pricing and availability aren't known at press time. Meike currently has this lens on display at NABShow 2023 in Las Vegas" [it wasn't] not that I care.

I'm with @entoman, this one is [CR0]

 

[SnowMiku]

Maybe an R5 S will have the full frame equivalent of the 90D/R7 sensor? Would that make it around 80MP? You would be able to crop the image to APS-C size if needed and it will have the same MP as the R7.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

Why would you need two sensors? We can already shoot small RAW, Full RAW, Crop, Non cropped, JPEG in very many sizes and 'quality settings'. I do not understand why a second sensor when these options are already available...?

The main sensor for me would always be the low megapixel one with all its advantages and the second one could be one with a higher pixel density that reduced the need for a very long lens in situations with enough light. The second sensor would not even haven to be full frame. It could be APS-C or even smaller. Like a 2x crop compared to full frame, but with the same number of pixels as the full frame sensor.

I still think it could be made. The would not have to be mounted flimsy inside the camera, but on a solid plate that would rotate or shift together with those sensors. At least that would be a way to increase the gap between cameras and smartphones again. Smartphones already have multiple cameras that often have different sensors with different resolutions.

Of course sports photographers might need two cameras anyway, but those will likely buy two cameras of the same model like two R5 or two R3. I was thinking about those photographers who now have to buy an R7 to their R3 just for certain situations. We might see next year if the R1 could do the job for those people: The same or more resolution as the R7 when cropped to APS-C, but still the same low light quality like the R3. I still have my doubts about that. If the R1 gets so much better at low light than other high resolution cameras, the R3 II might become even better at low light and still be the choice for people who need to shoot handheld at night.

 

[AlanF]

The main sensor for me would always be the low megapixel one with all its advantages and the second one could be one with a higher pixel density that reduced the need for a very long lens in situations with enough light. The second sensor would not even haven to be full frame. It could be APS-C or even smaller. Like a 2x crop compared to full frame, but with the same number of pixels as the full frame sensor.

I still think it could be made. The would not have to be mounted flimsy inside the camera, but on a solid plate that would rotate or shift together with those sensors. At least that would be a way to increase the gap between cameras and smartphones again. Smartphones already have multiple cameras that often have different sensors with different resolutions.

Of course sports photographers might need two cameras anyway, but those will likely buy two cameras of the same model like two R5 or two R3. I was thinking about those photographers who now have to buy an R7 to their R3 just for certain situations. We might see next year if the R1 could do the job for those people: The same or more resolution as the R7 when cropped to APS-C, but still the same low light quality like the R3. I still have my doubts about that. If the R1 gets so much better at low light than other high resolution cameras, the R3 II might become even better at low light and still be the choice for people who need to shoot handheld at night.

A sensor having high and low resolution would be made electronically by having settings to bin pixels in RAW as has been done for jpegs for many years.

 

[usern4cr]

One model that we have not mentioned is a replacement for the Ra. Simple enough to remove the low pass filter and have 2 models.
It has been 4 years since the Ra was released. Clearly we still have the R though.

Canon releasing the Ra after the 60Da would give some credibility that there was sufficient volume to warrant the cost of a second model. The only other competitor was the Nikon D810a

I wonder if the sensor is initially manufactured without color filtered lenses, and if all the pixels are identical, and if the color filter array is added after that? If so, you'd think it would be possible to produce an identical camera with monochrome visible light filter array.

They'd still have to change the firmware as needed to reflect the new usage. I'm guessing they'd want to add additions for astro use, like tracking ability to compensate for star movement. If so, it would be nice if they made those additions available in the regular R5 so that you could use it for single colored shot astro use, at lower quality & speed when compared to the monochrome version? That's similar to including stills & video feature in the same camera and just adding astro use to those two.

 

[koenkooi]

I wonder if the sensor is initially manufactured without color filtered lenses, and if all the pixels are identical, and if the color filter array is added after that? If so, you'd think it would be possible to produce an identical camera with monochrome visible light filter array.

They'd still have to change the firmware as needed to reflect the new usage. I'm guessing they'd want to add additions for astro use, like tracking ability to compensate for star movement. If so, it would be nice if they made those additions available in the regular R5 so that you could use it for single colored shot astro use, at lower quality & speed when compared to the monochrome version? That's similar to including stills & video feature in the same camera and just adding astro use to those two.

Pentax style star tracking using IBIS + GPS would be nice to have in all IBIS equipped bodies, but judging from previous behaviour, Canon will only include that in the astro bodies.

 

[Del Paso]

Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. This becomes a matter of personal ethics and responsibility. The accepted standard for nature, wildlife, sports, journalism, etc., is not to manipulate an image beyond what was possible using traditional darkroom techniques.

It’s a matter of personal choice, but for me I have no interest in taking and displaying pictures that don’t reflect my own abilities. I’m in this to push my own limits. I want to have the personal satisfaction of being able to say I was there and this is what I saw.

I may be naïve but I think that will always be the appeal of photography for many people.

I fully agree with your comment. The day AI takes over photography, I'll quit the game and let my brain memory take over.
There still is a huge difference between editing a picture and letting AI take full responsibility for the result.
Shutter speed, diaphragm, ISO and composition are mine!
And no, you are certainly not being naive...

 

[Del Paso]

The R5 is very good in my use. I will keep using it for some time. Have anybody heard of the rumered RF 24-105 MM f/2.8? I am waiting patiently for Canon to bring it to the market.

Me too, but I'm afraid it was only a rumor. The current 24-105 F4 is, in my opinion, a bit disappointing, mostly at 105mm.
But if the F 2,8 ever hits the market, my hopes are it could be optically as good as the 24-70 F2,8...