Canon EOS R1 Specifications [CR2]

[Loswr]

If you dig closely enough, it was a Canon executive that said it in an interview. And it's been referenced a ton while people awaited the release. So that's how Canon portrayed it and the rumored specs now make it significantly underwhelming.

So you've dug closely? By all means, share the relevant references...

 

[Deleted member 383640]

For me, having in-camera USB-C PD charging made the battery situation a lot more tolerable.

For charging, I agree that it is a good solution, although I rarely use it. However, during work in the field, we almost always work with 3 cameras, the batteries have to be changed on the fly... In these conditions, it turned out to be best to have one type of battery (which, by the way, lasts quite a long time) for all cameras. In addition, I found that although USB-C charging is universal, it is still significantly slower than charging in the dedicated Canon charger.

 

[frankchn]

No way. It doesn't have dual CF Express card slots and it goes against their 4 year pro cam cycle which has been consistent forever.

Introducing a 1 series flagship camera 2.5 years after the launch of a new mount would be consistent with what they did for EF mount. EOS 1 was introduced 2.5 years after EOS 650, and the R3 was introduced 2.5 years after the EOS R/RP.

 

[Loswr]

As much as the apologists disagree, I don't think that's an unrealistic expectation actually.

Explaining ≠ apologizing. You can expect anything you want, realistic or unrealistic. I agree that a high(ish) MP 1-series camera is a reasonable expectation. But you seem to think Canon must meet your expectations...that is what's not realistic.

 

[AJ]

Interesting set of specs. So, no global shutter, but something close to it. Sony put a global shutter in their A9III, which resulted in a reduced pixel count and lowered dynamic range. Canon's specs indicate (slightly) more megapixels and better DR. Seems like a good compromise to me... Canon seems to be thinking about photography while Sony seems to be more concerned with technology (I say this as I duck for cover)
As for megapixels - 30 Mpix is just about right for many applications. I'm thinking there may be a R3s at some point in the future?

 

[bbasiaga]

The sensor in the 5DSr had very poor dynamic range, low light performance and readout speed. It was a nice studio camera but the fact that they never expanded on it said all you need to know.

Obviously you didn't get the point. If you think that the R7 with a Sigma zoom is good enough, then stick with it. Don't ever buy a better performing camera because "you can take good pictures with an R7". Why even care to comment about better performance when you seem to think it's irrelevant??

I think the R5 sensor solved all those issues pretty well. Why was it not 60,80,100mp you might ask ? Does that mean they can't make one at that resolution? Nope. We know they can, just based on their APSc sensors. They know the market isn't there for it, yet.

Brian

 

[bbasiaga]

Interesting set of specs. So, no global shutter, but something close to it. Sony put a global shutter in their A9III, which resulted in a reduced pixel count and lowered dynamic range. Canon's specs indicate (slightly) more megapixels and better DR. Seems like a good compromise to me... Canon seems to be thinking about photography while Sony seems to be more concerned with technology (I say this as I duck for cover)
As for megapixels - 30 Mpix is just about right for many applications. I'm thinking there may be a R3s at some point in the future?

With a 1/1250 sync speed....not sure what else a global shutter gets you that you need. If the rolling shutter is basically gone due to high enough read speed, and the sync speed is way high like that, what else does GS bring to the table? Honest question.

Like the days of BSI to rule them all, because of reduced noise and read speed, it may be that the 'old' (competing is a better term) technology has effectively closed the gap. FSI and BSI are functionally equivalent these days, if the BSI is not stacked.

Brian

 

[Quack]

Quite disappointed again. This MP count is again not sufficient for my needs. Sounds very good...for an R3ii!

Then buy an R5. Or wait for the R5 II. Simple solution.

 

[Deleted member 383640]

Explaining ≠ apologizing. You can expect anything you want, realistic or unrealistic. I agree that a high(ish) MP 1-series camera is a reasonable expectation. But you seem to think Canon must meet your expectations...that is what's not realistic.

I expected the R6 mark II to have a better AA filter than the one the R6 had, but it doesn't. For this reason, I still shoot with the R5, even though its 45MP is still quite overkill for what I need, but it's easier for me to deal with "too big" files than with fixing the false colors and moire that sometimes and in certain circumstances come from the R6 Mark II sensor. But at the same time, I see that a lot of people are enthusiastic about the sensor that is in the R6 Mark II (and the R6), so that tells me that the "problem" is with my use case, not a failure in general. So, I found a tool that suits me best with all its advantages and "flaws" - it could be better, but always and everywhere it can be even better, faster, more - right?

 

[dcm]

Canon is playing the game differently. Here is Simon Sinek's view of an infinite player like Apple, which could just as easily be Canon. They are not chasing other companies' specs. There are interesting parallels with the other companies in the camera space.

 

[Quack]

The thing that bothers me the most about this is the claimed 1 second pre-shooting. Unless they fix the DPP implementation that only allows extracting the images (from the pre-buffer roll) ONE AT A TIME, the feature is USELESS. I was so excited for this feature on my R8, but in practice it is such a pain to use. It takes so much time extracting each image from the roll, and DPP is so clunky and error prone that I just stopped using the feature. There is a thread on Canon community website where lots of people complain about this issue. So far, there has been no response from Canon and the thread is getting old now.

How can Canon advertise such a feature and make it so terrible in practice? I am a professional software developer so I have no tolerance for such an OBVIOUSLY poorly implemented feature. Canon knew it stunk but shipped it anyway.

I have pre-shooting on the R7 and the OM-1. On the OM-1 you get all the shots not bundled. The Canon method is so much easier, in my opinion, at least in my experience. Why? You do it in camera first of all - not in DPP. When you use pre-shoot, in almost all situations, you are extracting 1, maybe 3 or 4 of the frames. In maybe half the cases, you didn't get the shot you want, so with one click (maybe 2?) you can erase the whole bundle, instead of erasing 80-90 individual shots if they are not bundled. Obviously, everyone's experience may differ.

 

[Quack]

The GOOD: I'm very glad the RUMOR is that global shutter isn't part of the package. Image quality matters more than anything and, if Sony is any indication, global shutter isn't ready to provide that.

The BAD: This seems like a pretty small step up from the R3. It's about what I would expect an R3ii to be. Perhaps this is verification that the R3 was really the R1, then was renamed at the last minute. Great camera . . but for birds, we need more than 24MP . . . or even 30MP.

For Birds, you do not need a 1 series camera, nor has the 1 series camera ever been for birds. The R5 is very good for birds. The R5 mark II when it comes out will be very good for birds. All cameras do not need to be the same.

 

[davidhfe]

Canon has spent lots of time developing DPP, I'm sure they think it's excellent and they choose provide it for free. I bet they even have professional software developers who write the code for DPP.

I agree with you about the UI, it's kludgy and I avoid DPP unless forced to use it (e.g., a new camera not yet supported by DxO PL). But like converting DP-RAW, for some features you're stuck with DPP.

Maybe I’m misreading you, neuro, but if canon requires their software to take advantage of a feature on a $5K+ camera, I don’t think its unreasonable for users to expect that software to exceed expectations. It’s not “free” software any more than macOS is “Free” software that comes with a Mac. If it’s required to use the product you’re shipping, it’s very reasonable for it to be better than what canon pushes for DPP.

If they don’t want to invest, then publish the file format so that third parties can provide the same functionality.

 

[Gogo7]

I see it but I’m not hyped about it . 30mp ???? When the Z9 is out there with 45??
Clog3 ?? All low-mid end canon cameras have Clog3 ! What’s special about that ?
I don’t know. I’m not so psyched about it right now.

 

[davidhfe]

More and more...I'm thinking the R3 originally WAS the R1....and Canon thought it wasn't up to flagship compared to competition, so they relabeled it R3...and waited for this iteration of the R1 line.

Just my $0.02,

cayenne

This sounds so conspiratorial, but also seems like such a reasonable interepretation. I was reading the specs for the R1 and my thought was “ok, so the R3 really was just a stopgap.” There just isn’t enough differentiation between these two models given the very low volume of “flagship” cameras.

 

[Quack]

The industry is changing a little more rapidly than it has when you had these small incremental advances. The fact remains that Canon will not have a comparable camera to compete with the A1 and Z9. And this is what they produce two years behind their competition. The "master of everything"? Hardly. Very disappointing. Canon cripple hammer strikes again!

Yet still behind the competition who put out better offerings over two years ago...

Glad to see the idiot cliches haven't changed. If you think the Z9 and A1 are better, go buy one (or both) of those.

 

[USMarineCorpsVet]

This statement is correct.

This isn't! And additionally, I didn't say that.
I only said that Canon decided (together with the dedicated customers) that an R1 doesn't need more than 30 MP.

It seems that you decided, that Canon has to design an R1 according to your needs, including 30 MP are not enough.
And maybe a lot of others think that way, too.
But it seems that Canon has knowledge of markets so that they decided that the R1 will sell even better with a 30 MP sensor than with more MP.
Maybe because it is just enough, maybe because it makes the workflow of those journalists faster (time is money), maybe just because DR and sensor IQ is just better, or the readout is faster, so rolling shutter is no issue that way.

And don't forget:
We're talking over a [CR2] rumour and not a Canon press release.

Feel free to complain about whatever you like.
Right now, I think there are more important things to complain about.
Things that I cannot change.
But if a tool doesn't work for me, I can change that by buying a better tool - for my purposes.
That doesn't mean, it's THE better tool for you or a sports journalist.

You completely overlook that the R1 is basically an incremental upgrade of the already fast low resolution camera that YOU claim everybody wants! Yet you completely ignore that two other successful camera manufacturers have flagships that have 45+ mpx sensors. For anyone who has been brand loyal and spent thousands of dollars on Canon products over decades, it's not "complaining" to expect them to offer cameras that their competition does. I wouldn't care if I didn't invest in buying their products. Since you hold yourself an expert on what everyone needs, what does Canon offer to compare to the Z9? Waiting.....

 

[USMarineCorpsVet]

Glad to see the idiot cliches haven't changed. If you think the Z9 and A1 are better, go buy one (or both) of those.

Stop being a brand apologist and face reality. There are plenty of photographers who are underwhelmed by the specs of this camera. Why get so mad? "Buy an R1 or leave". That's more of an idiot cliche than anyone who dares question the specs here...

 

[Quack]

... Canon seems to be thinking about photography while Sony seems to be more concerned with technology (I say this as I duck for cover)

No reason to duck. I think anyone with experience with both brands knows this to be true...and so obvious. It's the biggest difference in philosophy between the 2 companies. Sony has never been hesitant to put out essentially Beta cameras on the market. They are out to win the spec wars, knowing that most of the YouTube influencers and reviewers will be impressed and rate the camera highly in their initial reviews where they have barely had a chance to use it. So specs are what get compared to their camera and the other brands. Even this thread has ample evidence that the spec numbers matter to a lot of people, and actual performance is not that important...until you buy the camera of course. Sony has clearly believed that if you have the specs, than usability is secondary, given their poor ergonomics, dust on sensor issues for years, terrible weather sealing in the 1st two generations, dimmer than the competition EVFs (but a higher resolution number!!) and other shortcomings.

 

[Deleted member 383640]

You completely overlook that the R1 is basically an incremental upgrade of the already fast low resolution camera that YOU claim everybody wants! Yet you completely ignore that two other successful camera manufacturers have flagships that have 45+ mpx sensors. For anyone who has been brand loyal and spent thousands of dollars on Canon products over decades, it's not "complaining" to expect them to offer cameras that their competition does. I wouldn't care if I didn't invest in buying their products. Since you hold yourself an expert on what everyone needs, what does Canon offer to compare to the Z9? Waiting.....

Bite the bullet and switch to the Nikon Z9. Maybe it will be an expense at first, but you will certainly know how to use all the advantages you see in the Z9 and you will be a much happier person, I'm sure. You just seem bitter like this.