Canon announcements coming at the end of August [CR2]

LesC

EOS RP
Jun 27, 2013
253
53
Essex, UK
500px.com
I think you're going to be waiting a while. The 6D II came out in 2017, and with the past 4 year release cycle you'd be looking at summer 2021. That's assuming that they ever release a new 6D series camera. The RP might be a suitable alternative in all honesty - it's not exactly the same, but it's close.
Yep, I doubt there'll be a 6D MKIII. Having said that, I love my 6d MKII but recently got the EOS R and since have used that 95% of the time - a bit smaller & lighter with a better sensor, although for action shots I'd probably still use the 6DMKII as first preference. I think they make a good pair together though...
 

Quirkz

EOS 80D
Oct 30, 2014
189
122
Weird. My classes have gone from predominantly Canon to predominantly Sony in the span of a year. It’s a community college photography program though, so there are more younger people than usual.

The most popular camera is the Sony A7Riii, followed by the A7iii by far.
Interesting. So new tech literate buyers, mostly. Makes sense. If I was that age, buying my first camera, with a lot of disposable income, I’d likely buy the Sony too. Sounds great on paper. These days, I just love the canon ergo, reliability, & lenses too much, and the promise of the RF mount to ever get anything else.

But I’d have definitely bought the Sony back then if I’d been able to afford it. And that’s the other surprise to me - they’re spending that much?
 

PGSanta

EOS 80D
Sep 5, 2018
140
105
San Diego, CA
Interesting. So new tech literate buyers, mostly. Makes sense. If I was that age, buying my first camera, with a lot of disposable income, I’d likely buy the Sony too. Sounds great on paper. These days, I just love the canon ergo, reliability, & lenses too much, and the promise of the RF mount to ever get anything else.

But I’d have definitely bought the Sony back then if I’d been able to afford it. And that’s the other surprise to me - they’re spending that much?
It's a relatively affluent area in CA. There are quiet a few of them with nicer cars at 19-20 than I have at 39. Demographics aside, it's been my experience that Sony is winning the younger crowed by a LARGE margin; who knows how that translates to the wider market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RobbieHat

Stereodude

EOS 80D
Jul 8, 2019
149
130
Any word on if it will have 24fps in 1080p? Seems to be all the rage lately with Canon to remove 24fps in 1080p and only leave 30fps in 1080p. If I can get the same quality of 1080p at 24fps that I’m getting on the EOS R but on the 90D I’d be one happy camper. Then I’d be covered for all my photo (nature and sports/wildlife which I’m horrible at Lol) and my video (hiking/backpacking/gear) needs for my YT channel.
It seems like they're too busy protecting their cinema camera lineup to let the plebes have p24 in their non-cinema cameras.
 

RobbieHat

EOS M50
Feb 4, 2015
41
31
54
Rocklin, CA/The Sea Ranch, CA
I also shoot landscapes and almost every photographer I am in workshops with has switched to Sony or Nikon. Canon has two compelling offerings at this point. 11-24 which many adapt to Sony and 5 dsr which just got one upped by Sony.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,261
290
Davidson, NC
I'd like to know what the stats are in CR history for somebody saying, "If this camera doesn't have X, I'm switching to Y". Better yet, I'd like to know how many of those people actually do switch.
In contrast, I don't much care about that. They are entitled to that point of view, and whether they are being honest doesn't affect me either way.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,973
1,190
119
Any word on if it will have 24fps in 1080p? Seems to be all the rage lately with Canon to remove 24fps in 1080p and only leave 30fps in 1080p. If I can get the same quality of 1080p at 24fps that I’m getting on the EOS R but on the 90D I’d be one happy camper. Then I’d be covered for all my photo (nature and sports/wildlife which I’m horrible at Lol) and my video (hiking/backpacking/gear) needs for my YT channel. Either way I’m pretty flippin excited for this. I love the EOS R but man do I miss the simplicity and button layout of the 80D. If the specs are correct and it has high quality 24fps in 1080p like the EOS R, then this may be the work horse camera that I’ve been waiting for. But then again the possibility of a 5D Mark V would keep me in the FF game with the friendlier cost of EF L Lenses. Can’t imagine the RF stuff will be priced too kindly.

Man my brain is so screwed up right now. Lol.
Has anybody ever met anybody that can tell the difference between 25p and 23.976 frames/s?

What are the downsides of recording in 25p PAL and outputting 24p NTSC?

What processes are you using to output 24p to 50/60Hz video?

It seems to me it doesn’t matter what footage I throw at the various video editing programs they output to the timeline settings or the output settings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,155
578
I was not hyping it in any way, merely quoting Bryan Carnahan of TSP verbatim. No more, no less. It was about the AF of the 5DIII versus the 5DIV not being the same, which was the point, not the the 5DIV vs 1DX. The AF of the 5DIII does not have the iTR that was introduced for the 7DII and is now in the 1DX, 1DXII, 5DSR and 5DIV.

Regarding YMMV, In contrast to your experience, I have used the 7D, 7DII, 5DSR, 5DIII and 5DIV extensively for bird photography and whereas the 5DSR is now my go to camera for static shots, the 5DIV is my first choice for birds in flight because its AF is noticeably the best of that bunch when fast accurate AF is required for rapidly moving small birds. You will find it repeated in many of my posts that the 5DSR is pretty competent for BIF (and even dragonflies in flight), but the AF of the 5DIV is the best for difficult shots.

My experience may differ from yours because we cover different mileage and you don’t shoot rapidly moving birds close up.

Later addition
I just remembered that Ari Hazeghi, whose specialty is difficult BIF photos, wrote a detailed critique of the 5DIV before before he went over to Nikon. http://arihazeghiphotography.com/blog/eos-5d-mark-iv-field-review/ There is a long section on the AF, in which he wrote: "First the good news, the EOS-5D Mark IV AF consistency is greatly improved over the EOS-5D Mark III which itself was quite a capable camera in the right hands. With the EOS-5D Mark IV, right off the bat, I noticed a higher percentage of tack sharp files with challenging subjects. It tracks very well against complex backgrounds, like the examples below." And there is a lot more. So, in your hands the 5DIII is quite capable, but for difficult BIF the 5DIV scores.
I think Bryan was the one doing a little bit of hyping.

Bryan's Quote from Chuck Westfall was with regard to the 1D X vs. 1D X Mark II. He translated that to the 5D Mark III vs. 5D Mark IV himself, apparently not realizing that the same PDAF sensor array hardware does not always equate to the same performance if the same processing hardware and routines are not used. I will admit that I have not used iTR with my relatively new 5D mark IV yet. My opinion may change after the upcoming fall football season.

A few paragraphs later in the same review, Bryan says: "The improved part of the 5D IV's AF system comes from the 150,000-pixel, 252-zone RGB+IR Metering Sensor. The 5D III has an iFCL (Focus, Color and Luminance) 63-zone (9x7 grid), dual-layer ambient/flash metering sensor with one layer sensitive to red/green only and the other layer being sensitive to blue/green only. "

The 5D Mark III does not have an RGB+IR metering sensor. The 7D Mark II does have an RGB+IR metering sensor with the same resolution and number of zones as the 5D Mark IV (which, apart from AF, also gives both the 5DIV and 7DII better metering in difficult lighting situations than the 5D Mark III). So in that sense, the 5D Mark IV is an improvement over the 5D Mark III, but not necessarily over the 7D Mark II.

Much further down in the cited review, Bryan says this: "Overall, I'm very happy with my 5D IV results. I still give the AI Servo performance edge to the 1D X Mark II, but the difference I'm perceiving is only very slight. The 5D IV is performing among the best-ever EOS DSLRs. " So even he eventually acknowledges that the AF systems in the 1D X Mark II and 5D Mark IV are not identical.

iTR was introduced with the 1D X in early 2012, not with the 7D Mark II that came out in late 2014. The 1D X was the first Canon EOS camera to have an RGB metering sensor (100,000 pixels in 252 zones with no IR) , which is a necessary component of iTR.

Further, iTR is only active with 61-point (1DX, 1DXII, 5DS/r, 5DIV)/65-point (7DII) automatic selection chosen as the AF Area Selection Mode. Far too many users of cameras with iTR stop reading there and do not realize that in AI Servo AF mode, the user selects the initial AF point with 65-point automatic selection . So even though iTR is available, not many shooters seem to use it. I use it sometimes when the situation warrants, but even with Accel./decel. tracking and AF pt auto switching set at maximum, it sometimes still tracks a little slower than I would like.
 
Last edited:

Stereodude

EOS 80D
Jul 8, 2019
149
130
Does 24 fps really look that different from 25fps?
It doesn't matter if they look similar. Film content isn't 25fps. You can't display 25fps content correctly on TVs in North America. This isn't a matter of p25 displayed at 25Hz on a monitor vs. p24 displayed at 24Hz on a monitor.

And if so, wouldn't the affect be even greater with shooting at 25fps and converting in Compressor or the like to 24fps?
There's only one acceptable way to "convert" 25fps to 24/1.001fps. Slow it down. If you want to slow everything down by 4.27% and then have to stretch the audio by the same amount because Canon, be my guest.

What are the downsides of recording in 25p PAL and outputting 24p NTSC?
What are you going to do? Discard every 25th frame and then drop 1 extra frame every 1000 frames? Blend the 25 frames at the right percentages to get 24/1.001 frames per second instead?

What processes are you using to output 24p to 50/60Hz video?
Why would you do that? If you're shooing p24 you most likely keeping it at p24.

There's no possible logical reasonable explanation for why Canon has removed p24 from their recent consumer cameras other than protectionism. Now that the difference in video quality no longer creates a sufficiently large enough market segmentation between their consumer cameras and the cinema lineup, they've removed p24 to make sure they don't lose Cx00 sales to the consumer models. Because you know lots of people out there were going to get a Cx00 but would buy a G7X III or G5X II instead if they could shoot at p24. ;)

Even if you accepted that sort of fantasy land logic, you'd still have to conclude that Canon hasn't thought this through. Canon apparently would rather lose those Cx00 sales to cameras from Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, etc. instead. Only in Canon land is making no money from a buyer preferable to making some money from them.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,155
578
Interesting. So new tech literate buyers, mostly. Makes sense. If I was that age, buying my first camera, with a lot of disposable income, I’d likely buy the Sony too. Sounds great on paper. These days, I just love the canon ergo, reliability, & lenses too much, and the promise of the RF mount to ever get anything else.

But I’d have definitely bought the Sony back then if I’d been able to afford it. And that’s the other surprise to me - they’re spending that much?
Those youngsters think a spec sheet is all that matters.

With the death of full-time photojournalism, their generation possibly will never realize the value of reliability under adverse conditions. They're also too young to remember an era when highly complex electronic devices just worked as they should right out of the box instead of needing three firmware revisions after the fact to get the bugs worked out of the beta level firmware things are released with now.

It's the same thing with lenses. All they care about is MTF and how sharp the edge of a flat test chart is, not realizing how much other properties of the lens (i.e. soft, creamy out of focus highlights) might be compromised to get that performance with a flat test chart or on a lab bench. More power to them if they want to be remembered for taking ultra sharp photos of flat test charts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quirkz

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,825
3,341
I think Bryan was the one doing a little bit of hyping.

Bryan's Quote from Chuck Westfall was with regard to the 1D X vs. 1D X Mark II. He translated that to the 5D Mark III vs. 5D Mark IV himself, apparently not realizing that the same PDAF sensor array hardware does not always equate to the same performance if the same processing hardware and routines are not used. I will admit that I have not used iTR with my relatively new 5D mark IV yet. My opinion may change after the upcoming fall football season.

A few paragraphs later in the same review, Bryan says: "The improved part of the 5D IV's AF system comes from the 150,000-pixel, 252-zone RGB+IR Metering Sensor. The 5D III has an iFCL (Focus, Color and Luminance) 63-zone (9x7 grid), dual-layer ambient/flash metering sensor with one layer sensitive to red/green only and the other layer being sensitive to blue/green only. "

The 5D Mark III does not have an RGB+IR metering sensor. The 7D Mark II does have an RGB+IR metering sensor with the same resolution and number of zones as the 5D Mark IV (which, apart from AF, also gives both the 5DIV and 7DII better metering in difficult lighting situations than the 5D Mark III). So in that sense, the 5D Mark IV is an improvement over the 5D Mark III, but not necessarily over the 7D Mark II.

iTR was introduced with the 1D X in early 2012, not with the 7D Mark II that came out in late 2014.

Further, iTR is only active with 61-point (1DX, 1DXII, 5DS/r, 5DIV)/65-point (7DII) automatic selection chosen as the AF Area Selection Mode. Far too many users of cameras with iTR stop reading there and do not realize that in AI Servo AF mode, the user selects the initial AF point with 65-point automatic selection . So even though iTR is available, not many shooters seem to use it. I use it sometimes when the situation warrants, but even with Accel./decel. tracking and AF pt auto switching set at maximum, it sometimes still tracks a little slower than I would like.
You are quite correct about the introduction of iTR. This morning, having read about it again, I turned it off to see if I got faster first acquisition, and I think I did. You should add the 5DIV to your list of gear! As I wrote, I prefer my 5DSR for IQ for squeezing the last bit of resolution, but the 5DIV is really good for fast and accurate AF. I sold my 7DII because the superb AF and excellent sensor of the 5DIV on the one hand and the reach of the 5DSR and its handling on the other, but I do miss a crop that gives me the good reach and smaller file size.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

slclick

PINHOLE
Dec 17, 2013
3,212
733
I also shoot landscapes and almost every photographer I am in workshops with has switched to Sony or Nikon. Canon has two compelling offerings at this point. 11-24 which many adapt to Sony and 5 dsr which just got one upped by Sony.
And I who also shoot landscapes know there's a lot more to it than a wide lens and that the 5Ds(r) is a top landscape body.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,973
1,190
119
Why would you do that? If you're shooing p24 you most likely keeping it at p24.
Don't get me wrong I'm not making excuses for a seemingly petty omission, but my point has validity. How is the outputted 24p being played? If it is in an NTSC region on a monitor it is going to be at 60, 120 or 240Hz, which kinda means the differences are not noticeable by anybody, 24 doesn't go in to 60!

I believe Canon's bean counters know what they are doing and have got corporate approval to do it, I don't know what that reasoning is and I don't profess to know the subsequent impact on sales, but their sales record does seem to indicate they have a plan. But, as a consumer I don't get bent out of shape about it because I am smart enough to know how to achieve whatever frame rate I desire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

Stereodude

EOS 80D
Jul 8, 2019
149
130
Don't get me wrong I'm not making excuses for a seemingly petty omission, but my point has validity. How is the outputted 24p being played? If it is in an NTSC region on a monitor it is going to be at 60, 120 or 240Hz, which kinda means the differences are not noticeable by anybody, 24 doesn't go in to 60!
Which is why most midgrade or better modern TVs have a 120Hz refresh rate so they can display p24 content without judder by using a 5:5 cadence instead of 3:2. You can't do that with p25.

And then doing what with it? Transferring it directly to film so you can project it?
:unsure: Is this is a serious question? How about watch it on a TV like you would any other p24 content... You know, like you do with Blu-ray, UHD Blu-ray, pretty much any scripted TV show, etc. that are all produced at p24.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,973
1,190
119
Which is why most midgrade or better modern TVs have a 120Hz refresh rate so they can display p24 content without judder by using a 5:5 cadence instead of 3:2. You can't do that with p25.
But many can't and very few people have issues with the 3:2 cadence, in fact most people don't even know it is happening! Even then you are ignoring my point about video editing programs, I can load any input footage with any frame rate and output at any other and all editing programs I have known just deal with it. Indeed I have made some basic input and output errors and even those get covered up.

Yes it is a seemingly mindless omission, but it is so easy to work around the only people that say it is an 'issue' seem to be incredibly naive or just out for page hits and vlog views.
 

Stereodude

EOS 80D
Jul 8, 2019
149
130
But many can't and very few people have issues with the 3:2 cadence, in fact most people don't even know it is happening!
So, ignorance is bliss? Using this argument we should all just be using our camera phones because it's good enough for more people and most people looking at our photos can't tell the difference.

Even then you are ignoring my point about video editing programs, I can load any input footage with any frame rate and output at any other and all editing programs I have known just deal with it. Indeed I have made some basic input and output errors and even those get covered up.
I'm not ignoring your point. You seem to think there's some magic happening in editing programs. There's not. They can either blend frames or decimate to change the frame rate. Both leave readily apparent undesirable visual artifacts unless the decimation is by an integer multiple of the original framerate. Even then shutter angle can bite you. No competent person shooting video shoots at a different framerate than they plan to output their project as unless they're overcranking the footage to slow it down later.

Your "solution" is no solution at all. It's like arguing that shooting the lowest res JPEGs in camera is basically the equivalent of shooting RAW because I can just resize the image in Photoshop later to the same overall size. Photo editing programs can load any input resolution and quality and output at any other so they're basically the same. :geek:
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,619
2,105
And then doing what with it? Transferring it directly to film so you can project it?

Do people using consumer-grade still cameras actually do that?
Only the artistic history buffs, and they always lead with 414 feet of red film for the orchestral overture before switching to blue and dimming the lights. At least, that’s how Robert said it should be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

PGSanta

EOS 80D
Sep 5, 2018
140
105
San Diego, CA
Those youngsters think a spec sheet is all that matters.

With the death of full-time photojournalism, their generation possibly will never realize the value of reliability under adverse conditions. They're also too young to remember an era when highly complex electronic devices just worked as they should right out of the box instead of needing three firmware revisions after the fact to get the bugs worked out of the beta level firmware things are released with now.

It's the same thing with lenses. All they care about is MTF and how sharp the edge of a flat test chart is, not realizing how much other properties of the lens (i.e. soft, creamy out of focus highlights) might be compromised to get that performance with a flat test chart or on a lab bench. More power to them if they want to be remembered for taking ultra sharp photos of flat test charts.
Yeahhhh.... I don’t get this position. The youngsters are adopting Sony because Sony is offering functionality at a value, not because they are looking at MTF charts. Sony has some of the fastest cameras out, and the best overall AF period.

I love Canon. I just bought the EOS R a second time instead of jumping ship, but Sony isn’t just flash... they are offering the FAR better mirrorless product RIGHT NOW. The youngsters don’t have ANY brand loyalty (for the most part), they are going for what’s perceived as the “best”right now. I don’t blame them, I get it; I hope I’m not the sucker that stuck it out with Kod... I mean Canon while the industry got pushed forward by an innovator.

Obviously I placed my bet on Canon, even though I think the R is a bit of a clunker, I believe that in the long run Canon will catch up with their tech, and offer what Sony has been unable to... soul.