A Canon camera has shown up for certification

Trey T

EOS 80D
Feb 6, 2019
161
89
mAh figures are not comparable if you don’t know the voltages. mWh is what matters.
If they use battery cells ranging from 14500 - 18650 series, they will operate at 3.7-4.2 volt. Cameras w/ two cells will operate between 7.2-8.4v. The voltages are a game of marketing, and the extremities can be seen between DeWalt (20V @ 5 cells) and Milwaukee (18V @ 5cells) tools
 

DarkPhalanx

Canon EOS R5
May 31, 2019
28
18
Montreal
www.instagram.com
I don’t want to make anyone cry. We need to get past this Chevy v. Ford pettiness. Sony, Nikon, Canon, Fuji... all make fine cameras and the others don’t need to fail for Canon to succeed. Me? Canon because of the ergonomics and lens quality. 5D IV, 6D II, RP, M5. But I could live with any of the others if necessary and I doubt my photos would suffer.

Being a gear-head, there is an inherently good thing about the typical "Chevy vs Ford vs Mopar" vibe. The constant goal to one up each other by the manufacturers can only be good for the end user.

I am in agreement with you though. It's important now, more than ever, for Canon to come through with a camera that delivers on what the majority of Canon faithful have been asking for, and do it without breaking the bank (compared to the competition's pricing). Yes, they are promising to deliver ground-breaking tech in their new camera, but they also know that they presently stand on a very slippery slope regarding their place in the mirrorless race.

Hoping that they can strike a good balance price-wise, and at the same time wake up Nikon so that the consumers are the overall winners in this.

(P.S. Chevy fan, through and through. 1968 Chevelle SS 396 (468 cid/560bhp))
 

Czardoom

EOS M50
Jan 27, 2020
45
96
Being a gear-head, there is an inherently good thing about the typical "Chevy vs Ford vs Mopar" vibe. The constant goal to one up each other by the manufacturers can only be good for the end user.
….
I guess it depends on how one defines "one up each other." If it just means adding specs regardless of the overall quality, then I would have to disagree. Having owned Canon, Olympus and Sony cameras in the past decade, I would much rather own a quality camera where the important specs function at the highest level, rather than just having specs for specs sake. This is why I frequently argue against the Sony fans who only believe in specs - not quality. All 3 cameras, for example, have dust removal systems in their specs, but Sony cameras were notorious for having far more dust on the sensor issues than the other two brands. Sony has IBIS, but reviewers have pointed out that it produces a problematic jitter during video (didn't do any video myself). Sony color can't compete in the eyes of most reviewers. Same with ergonomics. I have owned Sonys and they underexposed by a full stop or more. I had two kit lenses with the A7 series cameras (not cheap kit lenses either) and they were both badly de-centered and had absolutely awful IQ away from the image center. In other words, compared to my Canon and Olympus cameras, the Sonys might have been a "spec winner," but were - by far - inferior in quality.

So, if the competition between brands ends up with cameras with more and more specs that perform worse and worse, then it won't be a good thing for camera buyers.
 

Cryhavoc

Eos R, EM1 MkII, Lumix G9, Lumix S1R
Jan 17, 2019
76
116
Seattle
Picked up a Lumix G9 during a recent sale at the local camera shop and chatted with the Sales guy about the R5. Speculation is the R5 will be in line, price wise, with what the 5d MKIV was at introduction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

DarkPhalanx

Canon EOS R5
May 31, 2019
28
18
Montreal
www.instagram.com
I guess it depends on how one defines "one up each other." If it just means adding specs regardless of the overall quality, then I would have to disagree. Having owned Canon, Olympus and Sony cameras in the past decade, I would much rather own a quality camera where the important specs function at the highest level, rather than just having specs for specs sake. This is why I frequently argue against the Sony fans who only believe in specs - not quality. All 3 cameras, for example, have dust removal systems in their specs, but Sony cameras were notorious for having far more dust on the sensor issues than the other two brands. Sony has IBIS, but reviewers have pointed out that it produces a problematic jitter during video (didn't do any video myself). Sony color can't compete in the eyes of most reviewers. Same with ergonomics. I have owned Sonys and they underexposed by a full stop or more. I had two kit lenses with the A7 series cameras (not cheap kit lenses either) and they were both badly de-centered and had absolutely awful IQ away from the image center. In other words, compared to my Canon and Olympus cameras, the Sonys might have been a "spec winner," but were - by far - inferior in quality.

So, if the competition between brands ends up with cameras with more and more specs that perform worse and worse, then it won't be a good thing for camera buyers.

When I speak of one-upping each other, and the winner being the consumers, quality is definitely the main focus, just so that we're clear.
 
Feb 27, 2019
63
20
The current chargers could well work, but not charge as efficiently (ie not as quickly) as the updated ones. That won't matter to a lot of people.
Maybe. We won't know till we get the new batteries. We have some interesting batteries in the technology I deal with for my day job. Some of it works fine together, some not at all, some... as you say, ok but not great.

Can is liable to do something like put a thick projection on the terminal end, next to the terminals, so the new battery may be the shape of the old as viewed from end, but from the side, it will have that projection that disallows it to fit in the old charger, or be used in the older cameras. They'd do that for safety reasons.

Its all up in the air for a bit, but time will tell.
 

David_E

Macrophotography
Sep 12, 2019
67
80
www.flickr.com
(P.S. Chevy fan, through and through. 1968 Chevelle SS 396 (468 cid/560bhp))
In the mid 60’s I was driving a ‘64 MGB. When my boss got a ‘65 Pontiac GTO, I was naturally anxious to try it, and I had occasion to drive it often in the wide-open spaces of West Texas. It offered excellent straight-line performance and little else. Compared to my little MG it had poor brakes, poor handling, and poor build quality. And that’s why I stuck to European, and later, Japanese, cars and never looked back. GM were still building 1950’s cars into the early 21st century and look where that got them.
 

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
543
363
Frankfurt, Germany
I'm disappointed more people didn't...how old is the average user on these forums I wonder
I am below 60, and younger than my 1954 Kodak Retina IIIc that I still sometimes load with a film. But I am roughly in the age of many Sony users I meet. When Hamish Gill reviewed the A7RII back in 2017 on his site 35mmc.com he asked himself: "a dad camera?" I think he may hit a deeper truth with that question...
 
  • Like
Reactions: AccipiterQ

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,302
539
I am below 60, and younger than my 1954 Kodak Retina IIIc that I still sometimes load with a film. But I am roughly in the age of many Sony users I meet. When Hamish Gill reviewed the A7RII back in 2017 on his site 35mmc.com he asked himself: "a dad camera?" I think he may hit a deeper truth with that question...
Except for pros, maybe all pricey ILS cameras are dad (or grandad?) cameras, at least to some extent.
 

DarkPhalanx

Canon EOS R5
May 31, 2019
28
18
Montreal
www.instagram.com
In the mid 60’s I was driving a ‘64 MGB. When my boss got a ‘65 Pontiac GTO, I was naturally anxious to try it, and I had occasion to drive it often in the wide-open spaces of West Texas. It offered excellent straight-line performance and little else. Compared to my little MG it had poor brakes, poor handling, and poor build quality. And that’s why I stuck to European, and later, Japanese, cars and never looked back. GM were still building 1950’s cars into the early 21st century and look where that got them.
You had 2 sides to the musclecars back in the 60's & 70"s. You had the consumer cars that were obviously geared towards quick acceleration/straight line speed. Then you had these same cars that were properly set up for SCCA and Trans Am racing, on such racetracks such as Watkins Glen, Road America, and some other great race venues. This is where the AAR 'Cuda, Camaro's and Mustangs were proven to be more than just straight line cars. And, btw, if your bass was on the cheap side, he may have ordered his GTO with 4 drum brakes, which back then was pretty normal. Obviously, the braking would suffer. Front disc brakes was an extra cost option.

The MGB was an "okay" car, but that's about it. With a total of 95 hp, it wasn't much to get excited about. Anytime you lower the stance of a car, it's give you the impression that it goes faster than it actually does. That's one of the reason's the regular run of the mill Mazda Miata was such a big seller.

I would agree with you that European cars are much better put together with respect to fit and finish, and so are the Japanese cars. The American cars of the 60's and 70's were on a completely different plane when it came to "bang for the buck" for the everyday normal person. That's why they sell for the price they do now (Barrett-Jackson Auction).
 
Last edited: