Canon EOS R5 pricing is still unknown, don’t believe the reports [CR0]

Dexter75

EOS T7i
Dec 18, 2019
55
44
That is laughable, nobody is making a choice between a $40k (usable) RED system and an R5, they are completely different markets. Now people that use RED's might buy a few R5's as well for crash cams etc, but nobody shooting RED's gives a damn about any non C Canon as a primary camera. It's as fallacious as saying they could be looking at a Samsung phone instead of a RED.

Canon make an entire range of C line cameras and lenses to cater for your "semi pro filmmakers" none of whom require 8k, the R line of cameras isn't it, the C500 II is the current darling at $15,000 but used C100's can be had for peanuts but the C line has specs and prices at every point in between to satisfy anybody.
really? Go look at how many semi pro and pro filmmakers gobbled up the 5D series DSLRs. A TON. A Red Monstro is $54k, only 35 megapixels and it’s sensor is alightly larger than the one in the R5. You don’t think filmmakers will jump all over a $5k camera that shoots 8k and 4K 120p with a 36x24 sensor and fantastic RF lenses? Please. I’m willing to bet more filmmakers buy the R5 than actual photographers, at least the first 6 months after launch. All the best goodies in the R5 are on the video side and Canon is clearly marketing it to videographers.
 
Last edited:

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,428
1,915
120
really? Go look at how many semi pro and pro filmmakers gobbled up the 5D series DSLRs. A TON.
The 5D offered something almost unique, a comparatively massive sensor that gave real world image benefits and looks even when viewed at small sizes, 8k doesn't do that so your comparison is nonsensical.

Back then people would make do with any limitation to get the sensor size, now people don't need to do without AF, zebras, false colors, waveforms, etc etc and those tools make much more impact on their creative endeavor than shooting 8k vs 4k.

Back then those semi pro and pro filmmakers didn't have the options of the C line that they do now let alone all the other video camera options like Blackmagic, secondhand RED's, heck I've even seen pre rental ARRI's for very affordable money.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,428
1,915
120
really? Go look at how many semi pro and pro filmmakers gobbled up the 5D series DSLRs. A TON. A Red Monstro is $54k, only 35 megapixels and it’s sensor is alightly larger than the one in the R5. You don’t think filmmakers will jump all over a $5k camera that shoots 8k and 4K 120p with a 36x24 sensor and fantastic RF lenses? Please. I’m willing to bet more filmmakers buy the R5 than actual photographers, at least the first 6 months after launch. All the best goodies in the R5 are on the video side and Canon is clearly marketing it to videographers.
That wasn't my point! My point was nobody who is seriously in the market for a RED Monstro is going to drop that to get an R5. Sure lots of videographers will get R5's, though they will inevitably realize the MILC format still isn't optimized for them and there is a reason real video cameras aren't built like that and have better CODEC's, recording options, and I/O.
 

x4dow

EOS M50
May 16, 2020
30
20
The 5D offered something almost unique, a comparatively massive sensor that gave real world image benefits and looks even when viewed at small sizes, 8k doesn't do that so your comparison is nonsensical.

Back then people would make do with any limitation to get the sensor size, now people don't need to do without AF, zebras, false colors, waveforms, etc etc and those tools make much more impact on their creative endeavor than shooting 8k vs 4k.

Back then those semi pro and pro filmmakers didn't have the options of the C line that they do now let alone all the other video camera options like Blackmagic, secondhand RED's, heck I've even seen pre rental ARRI's for very affordable money.
no one on the market for a red is going to buy a R5 that lineskips on 4K and has 10 stops DR. people that buy red want things like high frame rates with full sensor readout, 15+ stops DR etc
 

Dexter75

EOS T7i
Dec 18, 2019
55
44
no one on the market for a red is going to buy a R5 that lineskips on 4K and has 10 stops DR. people that buy red want things like high frame rates with full sensor readout, 15+ stops DR etc
and you know this about the R5 how? Troll...
 

x4dow

EOS M50
May 16, 2020
30
20
and you know this about the R5 how? Troll...
you expect the R5 to READ the sensor at 8k dci 120fps (reading time of less than 8ms) ?
here;'s an example of the output options of sensors.
This is a sony imx409 (able to do the same as the announced R5 specs so far)
The R5 will not have a sensor with 8k120p reading mode. if did, it would be able to do 8k120p raw
The 4k120p will not be Downsampled from 8k capture. thats not just a CPU limitation, its a sensor limitation.
In the sensor below, there's options for 8k 30, 8k 60 (upscaled from 8208x2160, just like the Sony fs700 upscales 1920x540 when shooting 480p or 1920x270 when 960p)
4k60, 4k120 and hd240p (resampling from 3020x1006)

The 4k60/4k120 options in the sensor below are reading a 4112x2168 signal from the sensor (it can be crop, or line skipping/bining without crop).

1589946724544.png
 
Last edited:

HarryFilm

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 6, 2016
567
93
dunno how you calculate 32MP (8k dci raw) being 4Gb per second when my A7R3 raws (42MP) were around 80Mb reach (and thats not 10 bit, its 14 if im not wrong) . 80x30 (30fps) woud be around 2.4Gb second.
Also note that this camera does 8k raw internal, so no way its 4Gb second.

DCI 8k video is 8192 by 4320 pixels or a total of 35,389,440 Pixels. At 10 bits per colour channel or 30 bit RGB/YCbCr colour per pixel (1.25 bytes per colour channel) = 132,710,400 bytes (131 megabytes per frame). At 30 frames per second that is 3,981,312,000 bytes or 3.98 Gigabytes per second or 238,878,720,000 bytes per minute (238.87 gigabytes per minute)

It also depends on what type of MATHEMATICALLY LOSSLESS compression is used for RAW file format is being used. I suspect LZW for the Canon R5 as that is the easiest to implement. Again, my estimates are a WORST CASE UNCOMPRESSED SCENARIO but my math stands as previously described!

In REAL WORLD USE, that true uncompressed video frame size of 131 megabytes SHOULD be reduced to around 65 to 90 megabytes or around 2.0 to 2.5 gigabytes per second using LZW mathematically lossless RAW compression.

Soooooo, my record time estimates likely will have a positive leeway from 25% to as much as 50% more time than what was stated per each memory card size DEPENDING UPON what Canon uses for RAW compression algorithms. These calculations are WORST CASE scenarios. We won't know the actual record times until someone TRIES the R5 camera recording for real!

Since I come from an era where a Betacam SP/HD-CAM tape was only 20 minutes or 30 minutes long, I can EASILY live with these record times of a minimum 24 minutes using 5:1 compression. Since I already use a fancy 50.3 megapixel MF camera that has two internal 8 Terabyte SSD drives that is a fully RFI/EMI/RAD-hardened space-rated system, I have no need for the R5's at all so they will go to the interns once the parent company buys a few!


V
 
Last edited:

Starting out EOS R

EOS R - RF24-105mm F4L, RF70-200mm f2.8L
Feb 13, 2020
120
104
Please show me where they put the EVF in the 1D X Mark III? I can't seem to find it.

Seriously, It might not be that easy with the hardware used by the EOS R. If the processor can't handle the entire load of processing the image and providing real time video at the same time, it's not possible for any software update to give that functionality.
Lol, interesting idea but obviously physically impossible. :) I think Jared Polin was using the live view feed in his video.

I was trying to say that if the live view feed could be diverted to the EVF during high FPS bursts, that would help? Im not an expert but maybe as you say, this isn't possible. I was thinking aloud as they say and maybe talking out of my a**se. :ROFLMAO:

Hopefully Canon have or will develop a way to help the EVF have little or no lag, otherwise it will mean the 12 fps performance will be worthless in the R5?
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,302
1,289
Lol, interesting idea but obviously physically impossible. :) I think Jared Polin was using the live view feed in his video.

I was trying to say that if the live view feed could be diverted to the EVF during high FPS bursts, that would help? Im not an expert but maybe as you say, this isn't possible. I was thinking aloud as they say and maybe talking put of my a**se. :ROFLMAO:

Hopefully Canon have or will develop a way to help the EVF have little or no lag, otherwise it will mean the 12 fps performance will be worthless in the R5?
They obviously have a way to do this, since sending a video signal to an LCD screen is no different than sending a video signal to a miniature LCD screen (e.g. an EVF). But just because they have demonstrated they can do it with one hardware configuration using the DiG!C X processor and the sensor in the 1D X Mark III does not mean they can do it with the hardware configuration already in the EOS R.

Just because the Chevrolet Corvette can do 0-60 in 2.8 seconds does not mean a software update will allow the Chevrolet Spark, which currently takes 10.7 seconds to accelerate to 60 mph, to match that feat.
 

cayenne

EOR R
Mar 28, 2012
2,203
280
They obviously have a way to do this, since sending a video signal to an LCD screen is no different than sending a video signal to a miniature LCD screen (e.g. an EVF). But just because they have demonstrated they can do it with one hardware configuration using the DiG!C X processor and the sensor in the 1D X Mark III does not mean they can do it with the hardware configuration already in the EOS R.

Just because the Chevrolet Corvette can do 0-60 in 2.8 seconds does not mean a software update will allow the Chevrolet Spark, which currently takes 10.7 seconds to accelerate to 60 mph, to match that feat.

Please excuse me, I"m likely missing something in this...but why are you talking about the EOS "R" and not the "R5" and its potential capabilities for sending no blackout feeds to the EVF analogous to the 1DX sending it to Live View lcd screen?

Again, maybe I missed something...this thread is a bit long after all.
:)

C
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,302
1,289
Please excuse me, I"m likely missing something in this...but why are you talking about the EOS "R" and not the "R5" and its potential capabilities for sending no blackout feeds to the EVF analogous to the 1DX sending it to Live View lcd screen?

Again, maybe I missed something...this thread is a bit long after all.
:)

C
Because one of the comments I was replying to seemed to indicate they thought the EOS R could be updated to such performance with a firmware update.


I'm sure there is a software fix that allows the EVF to show an uninterrupted live view while images are being taken. I'd be happy with this as opposed to the lag the R currently has.
 
Last edited:

Starting out EOS R

EOS R - RF24-105mm F4L, RF70-200mm f2.8L
Feb 13, 2020
120
104
Because one of the comments I was replying to seemed to indicate they though the EOS R could be updated to such performance with a firmware update.
Lol, the written word is a wonderful thing. I actually didn't think about the R being updated, Nice idea though. I was really thinking about this being on the R5. Obviously not clear enough as having an effective lag free EVF on the R5 would be more helpful with the high FPS, otherwise it may render it pointless to have it, whereas the R FPS isn't that high any way and I dont think many people buy the R for sports or action photography so whilst a nice to have, maybe not as important.
I watched an interesting YouTube video last night with a Landscape / travel Pro who has both the R & RP and he acknowledged the same issues, saying he would be buying an R5 and would probably get rid of the R as he felt the RP(currently used to vlog / b roll) whilst having lower specs is a great back up camera being almost half the price of the R so easier to replace, with only marginally less performance.
Time will tell as to what Canon's long term line up will end up looking like and what bodies survive if any are dropped.
 

koenkooi

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
886
665
[..]
I watched an interesting YouTube video last night with a Landscape / travel Pro who has both the R & RP and he acknowledged the same issues, saying he would be buying an R5 and would probably get rid of the R as he felt the RP(currently used to vlog / b roll) whilst having lower specs is a great back up camera being almost half the price of the R so easier to replace, with only marginally less performance.
Time will tell as to what Canon's long term line up will end up looking like and what bodies survive if any are dropped.
Was that the Brendan van Son one?
 

Starting out EOS R

EOS R - RF24-105mm F4L, RF70-200mm f2.8L
Feb 13, 2020
120
104
Was that the Brendan van Son one?
It was indeed. He's an entertaining guy and seems a little more normal than some of the other YouTubers. I can see his point re keeping the RP. I'm not sure I would do the same but then again, I dont make my living from photography or Youtube.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,302
1,289
It was indeed. He's an entertaining guy and seems a little more normal than some of the other YouTubers. I can see his point re keeping the RP. I'm not sure I would do the same but then again, I dont make my living from photography or Youtube.
The other reason arguing against selling an RP is that it wouldn't bring in that much money, considering anyone can buy a new one for $999 or less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starting out EOS R
May 18, 2020
6
7
Regarding pricing, a while ago a camera rep told me this, Almost every camera manufacturer figures out the price point first, then figures out what features they can afford to include for that price. The exception being Leica; they build the camera they want to build and figure out the price after the fact. I suspect that Canon set the price for this camera during the development process, and the recent pandemic and other market forces won't affect the price much. That said, my guess is it comes in around $3800, but that is only a guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HenryL and cayenne

Dexter75

EOS T7i
Dec 18, 2019
55
44
you expect the R5 to READ the sensor at 8k dci 120fps (reading time of less than 8ms) ?
here;'s an example of the output options of sensors.
This is a sony imx409 (able to do the same as the announced R5 specs so far)
The R5 will not have a sensor with 8k120p reading mode. if did, it would be able to do 8k120p raw
The 4k120p will not be Downsampled from 8k capture. thats not just a CPU limitation, its a sensor limitation.
In the sensor below, there's options for 8k 30, 8k 60 (upscaled from 8208x2160, just like the Sony fs700 upscales 1920x540 when shooting 480p or 1920x270 when 960p)
4k60, 4k120 and hd240p (resampling from 3020x1006)

The 4k60/4k120 options in the sensor below are reading a 4112x2168 signal from the sensor (it can be crop, or line skipping/bining without crop).

View attachment 190497
that’s all pure speculation on your part. You have no idea what sensor Canon has in the R5 and what is capable of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
680
678
Hamburg, Germany
that’s all pure speculation on your part. You have no idea what sensor Canon has in the R5 and what is capable of.
The argument is good though. If the R5 could read and downscale the entire sensor 120 times per second, it would have 8K RAW 120p mode. Since it doesn't, 4K 120p can't be based on the full sensor resolution. So it's skipped, cropped or binned.

That's less speculation than simply a fact. Let's keep in mind that 8K 30p or 4K 120p (and 45 MP 14 bit 20 FPS for that matter) is already an insane amount of data and Canon pulling that much from the sensor makes them the unchallenged king of throughput once this minster comes out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974
Feb 15, 2020
89
72
The argument is good though. If the R5 could read and downscale the entire sensor 120 times per second, it would have 8K RAW 120p mode. Since it doesn't, 4K 120p can't be based on the full sensor resolution. So it's skipped, cropped or binned.

That's less speculation than simply a fact. Let's keep in mind that 8K 30p or 4K 120p (and 45 MP 14 bit 20 FPS for that matter) is already an insane amount of data and Canon pulling that much from the sensor makes them the unchallenged king of throughput once this minster comes out.
Let's just say the camera could process 8k at 120fps, could the CFexpress card even cope with that amount of data?

Also, I believe the 1DX mark iii is only 12bit in 20fps mode. I would guess the R5 will also drop its bitrate for the 20fps mode.