Canon EOS R5 Mark II sensor resolution likely to stick at 45mp but with new AI features [CR2]

[EOS 4 Life]

Yes, I would look in to sponsoring Magic Lantern.

There is no such thing.
Magic Lantern is fully volunteer.
There are however some side projects that take money.
That is a murky legal area that Magic Lantern wants nothing to do with.

 

[bbasiaga]

I would definitely prefer to buy a subscription instead of buying a new camera because my current camera is no longer supported.

Why do we have to give up the current model where we paid for our camera and it will work until its circuit boards fail? Why do we have to pay for something, then continue to pay for it to be able to use it?

Brian

 

[chasingrealness]

@Bob66 @bbasiaga @EOS 4 Life @amorse I appreciate your responses to my question. Thank you. I agree I would prefer a one time purchase price with no strings.

 

[AlanF]

Do you have teenage kids? That may be a desirable feature.

Meanwhile, on the inside of my Bosch fridge:
View attachment 215120

It's in French as well for @Del Paso !

 

[HMC11]

It was exactly that.
Deep learning is just a higher degree of machine learning.
It is a term of art.
I doubt most lay people know what it means or even care.

Indeed. On a tangential note, I shudder to think that we could reach a point where it is difficult to distinguish between machine-generated and photographer('s skills) generated photo. Imagine a camera that can automatically recompose, crop, adjust the colours (they already do somewhat) according to the genre, remove noise, add/substrate DoF, etc based on personal preferences (that the AI learns about the user). I do not know whether to welcome this, toss out photography, or go back to film.

 

[AlanF]

Indeed. On a tangential note, I shudder to think that we could reach a point where it is difficult to distinguish between machine-generated and photographer('s skills) generated photo. Imagine a camera that can automatically recompose, crop, adjust the colours (they already do somewhat) according to the genre, remove noise, add/substrate DoF, etc based on personal preferences (that the AI learns about the user). I do not know whether to welcome this, toss out photography, or go back to film.

Go back to film and the rest will look at you in their rear-view mirrors or more likely their rear view cameras as they accelerate into the future. Seriously, the field of painting changed because of the introduction of photography, and so photographic artists will have to adapt.

 

[trounds]

Give us AI that ignores sticks and twigs when hunting for birds. Grab focus on the bird that's perched inside a thicket or forest. Do THAT automatically, and Canon will own the bird photography market.

I agree!!!

 

[mpmark]

Subscription is something I personally dislike extremely. Buying features is a totally different thing. Just my opinion.

I agree with you, sadly subscription is the new way of business, many companies have taking profits to new levels by moving to a subscription base. So I am not surprised Canon is trying to jump into that pool as well, but it doesn't work for everything, software business yes, but this features thing Canon may try? Im not buying it

 

[mpmark]

However, the only thing that has to be better /much better for me to get interested in updating my R5 is speed/responsiveness and AF.

That's what normally happens when you release a new camera

 

[roby17269]

Am I the only one who thinks that turn to a subscription model makes the company look desperate?

Adobe does not look desperate to me...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Am I the only one who thinks that turn to a subscription model makes the company look desperate?

Yes, the company that has nearly 50% of the market is 'desperate'. Mmmmmkay.

 

[roby17269]

In what world is 45 low resolution. That’s much higher than most cameras already. The average is 24-35. I’d MUCH rather not go up to 60. What canon needs to do is come out with an “r” model like LUMIX, where it’s focused on the shooter who for some reason want higher MP.

And I'd rather have 60mp+, 80mp even better. Who's right between me and you? Hint: we both are, we just have different needs and wants and constraints which are all valid... for us specifically.

Incidentally, Canon offers plenty of choices already for people not wanting high resolution sensors.

 

[AlanF]

Adobe does not look desperate to me...

They just look very greedy.

 

[roby17269]

The subscription model is already beginning to show some fatigue, as TV streamers offer a lower subscription price with advertising v without advertising. Here's your real nightmare: turning on your discounted-price R52 and watching 30 seconds of ads on that 3-inch display from Pepsi, B&H Photo, Ozempic, etc. An ad-free R52 will still be instant on, but you’ll pay more for that privilege. Camera displays may be the final frontier for advertisers. Yuck.

I do not think they will do that... there's simply not enough of us left, old geezers looking at little screens that are not on phones

I know you were joking

 

[mpmark]

I was definitely one of the few people hoping for more resolution, but it is what it is I guess! I'm sure there are thousands if not hundreds of us!

Jokes aside, if Canon moves to a subscription service for bodies I am very likely out. I'm content paying for a better feature up front (or even later - I was one of the few that paid for c-log on my 5DIV), but if this is a recurring fee for use of a product I already purchased, then I'm pretty off-put by that idea. I would hope any subscription service means that the service keeps delivering new things, like meaningful changes, but if it's extracting money from me for a body and features I bought ages ago, or if my features get disabled when I cease my subscription, then I'm not ok with that.

I tend to buy every other cycle at best. If that strategy no longer saves me money in the long run because of a subscription model, then I really have to take a hard look at any future purchases.

I think everyone is getting ahead of themselves on this, Canon hasn't even done anything yet, lets wait before we decide to criticize and opt out of anything.

 

[Del Paso]

It's in French as well for @Del Paso !

This is killing me!

 

[HMC11]

Go back to film and the rest will look at you in their rear-view mirrors or more likely their rear view cameras as they accelerate into the future. Seriously, the field of painting changed because of the introduction of photography, and so photographic artists will have to adapt.

I guess my musing is whether AI in photography will get to the point where the photographer's input becomes miniscule or to the extent that it is largely irrelevant. On the other hand, photography might evolve into a form that cannot be imagined today, and we evolve with it in tandem. Meanwhile, I will enjoy its present form or something close enough where the photographer's input matters.

 

[[email protected]]

Either way, it will be “newly developed”…

LOL... I think they used the language "completely new" over and over again in that 2-3 year period where they ran with the same 18mp sensor, just changing the microlenses. I always thought that would eventually get them in trouble with the FTC on a claims issue if some user decided to get pedantic about it (what; a forum user pedantic?!).

We have some good experience in the camera industry with subscription attempts, and it doesn't bode well for Canon. The ones that were more successful (high-end video rigs) came from a place of spec leadership, where the subscription feature went over and above what any other brand could offer.

I don't mind subscriptions. For all my bellyaching when Lightroom went to subscription, they actually - and surprisingly - continued to deliver more and more value over time with the updates. Not really a Canon pattern, though.

Another user above noted that a subscription could subsidize initial hardware cost, which I find intriguing. Imagine a $199 R5 II, with a $99 per month sub. You'd pay about $5k running that rig for four years, and I bet more people would wind up getting 2 rather than 1. That's kinda interesting, especially if you were given the option of buying outright or subscribing, making it essentially a financing plan option. This would have different tax consequences (pro and con) depending on your country for pros.

In terms of the resolution issue, 45 is a nice middling resolution nowadays, but it would be notable that Canon alone would lack a high resolution sensor. This isn't good for a narrow subset of the market (which I happen to be in).

Canon has a long tradition of putting its foot into a product category with a relatively safe, uninteresting spec sheet relative to the competition. The Canon EOS R, for example. Where it does blow the doors off the spec sheet (6d, R5, 5D Mark II, 1Dx, etc.), it typically introduces a Mark II four years later that is pretty disappointing. That is likely because expectations of the series are over-high, but both of those trends suggest a non-bold R1 and a disappointing R5 II.

Upshot: I think the R5 series is the workhorse product line for Canon. I believe how they manage that product line has an outsized effect on its marketshare among the audiences buying the high profit margin cameras (not to be confused with general marketshare). Even the R1 market is likely to be looking to rely on R5 bodies as well for other use cases. I think there are three areas that Canon could screw up that could cause it to eventually lose its perception of industry leadership: supertele lenses; 1 series body; 5 series body. I personally consider recent bread-and-butter supertele releases to be disappointing relative to other brands', though there are exceptions (100-300). The R1 and R5 II will be critical releases for lines that haven't been upgraded in half a decade. If we get an R5 II that doesn't satisfy the landscape/wedding photographer/general pro, and an R1 that is perceived as 85 percent the camera of the new Sony/Nikon offerings, this will not be as good 5-year cycle for Canon. This doesn't spell doom, but it could lower share by a few points, almost all of those points coming from the high-profit-margin side of the product line.

 

[jam05]

One time purchase of downloaded firmware. Subscription No.

 

[[email protected]]

Another user above noted that a subscription could subsidize initial hardware cost, which I find intriguing. Imagine a $199 R5 II, with a $99 per month sub. You'd pay about $5k running that rig for four years, and I bet more people would wind up getting 2 rather than 1. That's kinda interesting, especially if you were given the option of buying outright or subscribing, making it essentially a financing plan option. This would have different tax consequences (pro and con) depending on your country for pros.

Ooh, just thought of something else: if a subscription scheme wound up being a finance plan of sorts, then it may have an interesting effect in having more users of other mounts test out Canon. Likewise, it would make it easier for Canon users to justify testing out another mount, as their sunk costs would be lower. Of course that ignores the capital invested in lenses.