Canon EOS R1 Specifications [CR2]

[PhotoBob]

I spent 7 years shooting semi-pro hockey, NHRA drag races, and college basketball and volleyball, and all other sorts of events. All Canon for 40 years. Never once on digital did I need 120fps or anything even close to it. What I always needed was a bigger sensor. 120fps sounds cool but most people will use it a few times and then stop, because the workflow in post will be ridiculously time consuming. I would have rather seen a 45+ megapixel sensor and a lower fps. The specs on this (if true) are a dealbreaker for me. Maybe they will do what they have done with the 1-series in the past and release a second body with a bigger sensor. I can hope it will be so before I'm in my grave. Canon is notorious for slow product rollouts.

 

[neuroanatomist]

So this whole thread is meaningless.

An apt summary of your contributions to it.

 

[frankchn]

I spent 7 years shooting semi-pro hockey, NHRA drag races, and college basketball and volleyball, and all other sorts of events. All Canon for 40 years. Never once on digital did I need 120fps or anything even close to it. What I always needed was a bigger sensor. 120fps sounds cool but most people will use it a few times and then stop, because the workflow in post will be ridiculously time consuming. I would have rather seen a 45+ megapixel sensor and a lower fps. The specs on this (if true) are a dealbreaker for me. Maybe they will do what they have done with the 1-series in the past and release a second body with a bigger sensor. I can hope it will be so before I'm in my grave. Canon is notorious for slow product rollouts.

It is useful for specific shots. I don't think anyone is using 120 fps all the time. I had a heck of a time trying to get ball on bat/racket shots in tennis and basketball when I was shooting D1 sports. Selectable 120fps with pre-shooting would make it trivial.

 

[marathonman]

According to that response, there should be no need to strive for anything better because anyone can make an acceptable image with a lesser performing sensor. Gotcha! So this whole thread is meaningless. Everything is subjective now and no one needs more than Canon determines they need...

That's a little dramatic dear. It's entirely possible that for the vast majority of people, the current technology available, is not the barrier to realizing their creative goals or ambition. There's usually a corner of the Internet that has their "knickers in a twist" (doesn't really matter what product category) irrespective of whatever feature set is put in front of them. If these specs are actually accurate, it seems to me that Canon have made some advancements in certain areas, but disappointed you in the areas that matter to you. C'est la vie.

 

[Bob Howland]

I spent 7 years shooting semi-pro hockey, NHRA drag races, and college basketball and volleyball, and all other sorts of events. All Canon for 40 years. Never once on digital did I need 120fps or anything even close to it. What I always needed was a bigger sensor. 120fps sounds cool but most people will use it a few times and then stop, because the workflow in post will be ridiculously time consuming. I would have rather seen a 45+ megapixel sensor and a lower fps. The specs on this (if true) are a dealbreaker for me. Maybe they will do what they have done with the 1-series in the past and release a second body with a bigger sensor. I can hope it will be so before I'm in my grave. Canon is notorious for slow product rollouts.

On the other hand, when the R3 was first introduced and somebody wanted 30MP, I pointed out that "24MP gives a 20" x 30" print at 200 pixels/inch. That is good enough for me and I would prefer sensor development emphasize other areas." I agree that 30 or 40FPS is quite adequate for most purposes. I shoot with an R6-2 and R7 and love that pairing.

 

[neuroanatomist]

On the other hand, when the R3 was first introduced and somebody wanted 30MP, I pointed out that "24MP gives a 20" x 30" print at 200 pixels/inch.

Also worth noting that the 24 MP of the R3 spatially outresolves the 30 MP of the R/5DIV sensor.

 

[John Wilde]

The cripple hammer isn't a figment of people's imagination.

You mean (DPR) "1.5x crop when capturing 4K/60p footage" and "EVF and LCD resolution on the low side" of the Sony a7C II?

 

[Bob Howland]

As I said, the DPP workflow is logical. It just doesn’t work for me. Notably, the workflow is different from that of the major/popular RAW converters. There’s a reason LR, DxO, C1, etc., do it the way they do.

Noted. However, my guess is that the image processors in cameras are massively parallel.

 

[Maximilian]

You completely overlook that the R1 is basically an incremental upgrade of the already fast low resolution camera that YOU claim everybody wants! …

You completely overlook something essential:
I didn‘t say what you interpret in my words.

I never said „everyone“.
I never said „30 MP is gold for everyone“.
I only said Canon will chose the specs that will sell the most.
If those are not according to your dreams you will have to deal with that - not me.

Some others will love to work with that tool you call „incremental upgrade“.
If your screw driver doesn’t work for your nail then go get your hammer.
But stop whining that others want it for their screws.

 

[Mik]

I don’t have anything meaningfull to ad but an annoying comment on that famous „cripple hammer“: Please, please, please at least in this particular case don‘t reference to that damn cripple hammer. Arguably that term is not completely stupid regarding specs of lower price cameras if one assumes certain specs are hold back solely to sell more upper price cameras. But why on earth in this case? They smashed the R1 to better sell what…? The R0? The R-1? Or even the R-2?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Noted. However, my guess is that the image processors in cameras are massively parallel.

Ok. What does that have to do with the UI of RAW conversion software running on a computer?

 

[tvexecutive]

Nikon's Z9 seems to be the clear winner for resolution, if this report is true.

If PJ and Sports are the target market 30MP will do.

For the BIF shooters, that have tried the Z9, the enhanced resolution and room for crops has been well received.

Something in me, tells me that the final R1 will have better specs. If these specs are true, then the R3 was the intended R1 and Nikon ruined Canon's party

 

[davidhfe]

Not disagreeing, but whose expectations should be exceeded? My point was that I have no doubt Canon believes that their software is great. It’s probably an area where they are flying somewhat blind. With hardware, they give it to NDA testers, but as I understand it those cameras output only JPGs. I suspect relatively few high-end photographers actually use DPP for anything.

Canon seems to have designed DPP with a workflow that doesn’t make sense to me, but I’m sure it makes sense to the designers. The logic seems to center around performing each sequential step on multiple images at the same time, rather than taking one image at a time from start to finish. It’s logic, just not my logic. Possibly the designers aren’t even photographers, when I talk to computer science folks, they always start numbering things with zero, whereas most of the rest of us start counting from one (Mayans not withstanding).

They make the .CR3 format available. I suspect it would be pretty easy for a third-party software maker to unpack a stack of images from a pre-shot burst, if there’s demand from their own customers to do so..

Only point I disagree with is that they believe their software is great. It’s a virtual certainty that they’ve got design and product folks in house who know DPP isn’t very good. But the higher up product folks know they don’t “need” to make it better. If I were a shareholder I wouldn’t necessarily disagree with the business decision, but as an end user I just thinking “if something is worth doing right…”

And as a guy who leads a software design team, if they don’t have a team who think DPP needs an overhaul, they need to hire better folks.

 

[danfaz]

But why on earth in this case? They smashed the R1 to better sell what…? The R0? The R-1? Or even the R-2?

Well said!

 

[domo_p1000]

Sounds about right.

 

[MiJax]

I only said Canon will chose the specs that will sell the most.

Honestly... I'd argue that's likely not true, but I understand the premise of what you're saying (being, Canon will do what they think is best for their vision). In terms of sales, if they wanted maximum sales they would spec it for the largest audience, not one of the smallest (PJ and sports). I've been a proponent of the thought that the well heeled "Joe Blow" is the largest market (that can afford to throw away that kind of money). Agencies buy a relatively small number of cameras and lenses and rely on freelancers with their own hardware. The few agency shooters I know, buy all of their own gear. On the flip-side, in my neck of the woods, I see well over a 100 people each year who own lenses and cameras in this category so I know the market isn't nearly as small as some people think.

 

[John Wilde]

It's being bitter because I'm underwhelmed by the Canon flagship?

How can you be underwhelmed by a camera that hasn't been announced?

All we have is some rumored specs, and we have no idea of what new/additional features it may have.

 

[danfaz]

How can you be underwhelmed by a camera that hasn't been announced?

All we have is some rumored specs, and we have no idea of what new/additional features it may have.

You know, we're 10 pages in now of a CR2 rumor! Kind of funny if you stop and think about it...

 

[john1970]

Nikon's Z9 seems to be the clear winner for resolution, if this report is true.

If PJ and Sports are the target market 30MP will do.

For the BIF shooters, that have tried the Z9, the enhanced resolution and room for crops has been well received.

Something in me, tells me that the final R1 will have better specs. If these specs are true, then the R3 was the intended R1 and Nikon ruined Canon's party

Or alternatively, the R3 was a test bed released in the middle of a pandemic and similar to the EOS-3 was a one of camera.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

Image quality can't be measured, only observed.

People put different meaning in 'image quality', but many aspects of image quality can be measured. Noise, resolution, sharpness, blown highlights...