Canon EOS R5 Specifications

[mjg79]

Of course IBIS will be available on the new R bodies. This month I got RF24-70 2.8L IS and RF15-35 2.8L IS !

I know that feeling!

Well the RF 15-35L IS is superior to the Ef 16-35L III in virtually every regard so I wouldn't feel bad about that.

The Ef 24-70L was one of those freak lenses I think, nobody since has made a 24-70 quite as sharp. A bit like Nikon did with their 14-24, sometimes someone gets it just right. And the Ef 24-70 was one such lens. If Canon does start shipping cameras with IBIS it will really give a new lease of life to that lens as you can usually buy it at very good price now.

 

[JohnC]

I'm in the later group, and I don't consider what I do "art" because I didn't create what I'm shooting, only how I'm shooting it, just like the audio technician at a recording session isn't creating the music, only capturing it. Why isn't that occupation (which requires no less skill than that of a great photographer) accepted as "art"?

Maybe it's art when I'm shooting a model airplane I built, because I did create that scene.

in that case however, you DID create the IMAGE using artistic tools (knowledge or equipment) that most often doesn't truly represent exactly the way it appeared in "real life"... so while you may not have created the flower, you did create the artistic expression of it that is represented in an image. Like I said though.. you certainly have the right to have whatever opinion suits you regardless of whether anyone else (or the majority) agree with you or not.

 

[amorse]

So, what makes art art is that someone thinks it's good or different? That makes no sense at all, especially in the light of this above:

"It doesn't matter if you call it art or not, it's not up to you or anyone else, it's art if the artist calls it art. "

Putting your comment and that one together means that anyone can call their own stuff "good" and therefore it's "art".

Here's a definition: "the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects "

My argument is simple - there is very little "creative imagination" involved in producing photographs - even ones other people would call "art" - compared to that which goes into creating real art, such as paintings, musical compositions, fictional plays, or sculptures. Photography is documentation, even when done really well in an aesthetically pleasing way.

I've always leaned on a different definition of art - anything created by someone with the intent of evoking an emotion in the person experiencing it. The determination of whether or not it is good art or not is in its success in evoking that emotion in the recipient. Very broad definition no doubt, but I think it works. There's lots of art out there that doesn't do anything for me, but certainly I find that photography and photographs evoke a lot more emotion to me than other forms. To each their own I guess!

 

[Lee Jay]

I've always leaned on a different definition of art - anything created by someone with the intent of evoking an emotion in the person experiencing it.

That definition would make a video of murder or torture art.

I don't think so, but it would evoke an emotion.

 

[amorse]

I'm in the later group, and I don't consider what I do "art" because I didn't create what I'm shooting, only how I'm shooting it, just like the audio technician at a recording session isn't creating the music, only capturing it. Why isn't that occupation (which requires no less skill than that of a great photographer) accepted as "art"?

Maybe it's art when I'm shooting a model airplane I built, because I did create that scene.

I think the audio technician is involved in creation of art. Certainly some recording artists have created whole songs or albums from ambient sounds and combining them to create some sort of interesting music. I would equate the recording technician for another artist as being no different than an assistant providing their skills to another artist for creation. Lots of artists use assistants in this way - I don't see that as being any different

 

[Lee Jay]

I would equate the recording technician for another artist as being no different than an assistant providing their skills to another artist for creation.

An audio technician is doing the same job a photographer is doing, just for audio instead of visual sources. So why are they an "assistant" to the artist while the photographer is the artist proper?

The composer creates the piece of music. That's art.
The musician performs that piece of music. That might be art ("performance art") or not, depending on whether or not they add their own embellishments, improvisations or other alterations to the piece. A MIDI device playing that piece wrote from the sheet music isn't an artist.
The technician recording the piece is just capturing what the composer and musician have produced. That job might (usually does) require substantial skill and the final output definitely depends heavily on the choices that technician makes, but that technician isn't widely accepted as an "artist" the way photographers (and composers and musicians) are. Why is that? I'll tell you why - because they didn't create the music, the same way the photographer didn't create the scene.

 

[Ozarker]

That definition would make a video of murder or torture art.

I don't think so, but it would evoke an emotion.

Well, so would painting such a scene on canvas.

 

[amorse]

That definition would make a video of murder or torture art.

I don't think so, but it would evoke an emotion.

This got dark real fast.

As awful and unthinkable as it is, someone sick enough to create a video like that probably sees it as art, where the rest of the world will see it as the unthinkable act that it is and would not ever dream of trying to experience it for the evocation of emotion. In that case, yes it would evoke emotion, but the rightful repulsion of society to such acts would preclude it from being successfully experienced art.

To be a bit less dark, lots of horror films are intended to outrage and provide no relief for the viewer - leaving them with feelings of sadness or frustration or anger.

 

[PGSanta]

His viewpoint is not dissimilar to the worldview on photography during it's onset. Artists and critics in the mid 1800's dismissed it in general and it wasn't until pictorialism style of photography in the late 1800's in which the masses started to accept it as an artform.

I’ve taken a class on the history of photography from the camera obscura to the modern age as well... none of us were speaking about the 1800s.

 

[amorse]

An audio technician is doing the same job a photographer is doing, just for audio instead of visual sources. So why are they an "assistant" to the artist while the photographer is the artist proper?

The composer creates the piece of music. That's art.
The musician performs that piece of music. That might be art ("performance art") or not, depending on whether or not they add their own embellishments, improvisations or other alterations to the piece. A MIDI device playing that piece wrote from the sheet music isn't an artist.
The technician recording the piece is just capturing what the composer and musician have produced. That job might (usually does) require substantial skill and the final output definitely depends heavily on the choices that technician makes, but that technician isn't widely accepted as an "artist" the way photographers (and composers and musicians) are. Why is that? I'll tell you why - because they didn't create the music, the same way the photographer didn't create the scene.

I disagree - the audio technician is instructed by the director/artist on what to capture and how it must be presented and the technician is tasked with getting it done - they're tasked with achieving someone else's creative vision. The photographer chooses what image to represent or what will evoke an emotional response. The photographer is the director, while the audio technician is being guided by the artist - the difference between the two is creative freedom. Now if the audio technician has full creative freedom, i.e. is choosing what they want to capture, putting that into a song or musical medium and presenting it for consumption, I'd call them the artist too.

 

[Kit.]

Just because all art forms accepted (except photography) can start from nothing

They cannot.

As Carl Sagan said, “If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.”

My argument is simple - there is very little "creative imagination" involved in producing photographs

It depends on who produces them, and for what.

- even ones other people would call "art" - compared to that which goes into creating real art, such as paintings, musical compositions, fictional plays, or sculptures.

There is very little "creative imagination" involved in most paintings, musical compositions, fictional plays, or sculptures. Especially paintings and sculptures.

 

[PGSanta]

so pretty much canon is going from the no-go camera for video to the holly grail if all video mirrorless cameras in one single update?

Some how i think this is a Santa's wish list to Canon other than the real specs of this camera....

Unless someone on Canon got sacked and a new managing guy took over it and change all Canon's ideas of what a great camera should have for specs, i'm 110% sure those specs won't happen in the next 4 years. They only started doing 4K on their cameras 1yr ago, do you have any idea how long its going to take for them to add 8K???? not to mention there isn't technology available to do that on a mirrorless camera yet.

So i wouldn't even hope for this kind of specs on a Canon camera anytime soon.

Canon is capable of doing this. Whether it makes sense to actually do is the question. Maybe they’re making enough of a margin and volume on lenses that they are willing to loss lead on bodies...

My gut is the specs are basically right, but the video will be 4K 30 at no crop, 1080 120. And it comes out at 3999.99.

 

[amorse]

so pretty much canon is going from the no-go camera for video to the holly grail if all video mirrorless cameras in one single update?

Some how i think this is a Santa's wish list to Canon other than the real specs of this camera....

Unless someone on Canon got sacked and a new managing guy took over it and change all Canon's ideas of what a great camera should have for specs, i'm 110% sure those specs won't happen in the next 4 years. They only started doing 4K on their cameras 1yr ago, do you have any idea how long its going to take for them to add 8K???? not to mention there isn't technology available to do that on a mirrorless camera yet.

So i wouldn't even hope for this kind of specs on a Canon camera anytime soon.

To be fair, the 1DXiii already has 5.5k now, the 1Dxii had 4k60 in at least 2017, and last year Canon demonstrated 8K capture in a new camera, and Apple even used an 8K canon camera at their announcement last year for the Mac Pro. I think 8K is well within their capability, but I too question whether or not their first commercial application of 8K will be in a consumer targeted stills-oriented camera and not the cini line.

 

[tron]

I know that feeling!

Well the RF 15-35L IS is superior to the Ef 16-35L III in virtually every regard so I wouldn't feel bad about that.

The Ef 24-70L was one of those freak lenses I think, nobody since has made a 24-70 quite as sharp. A bit like Nikon did with their 14-24, sometimes someone gets it just right. And the Ef 24-70 was one such lens. If Canon does start shipping cameras with IBIS it will really give a new lease of life to that lens as you can usually buy it at very good price now.

I beg to differ a little as per the-digital-picture-site. 15-35 is virtually the same to 16-35 but for even worse vignetting! I haven't been able to use/test them yet.

 

[Memdroid]

Unless someone on Canon got sacked and a new managing guy took over it and change all Canon's ideas of what a great camera should have for specs, i'm 110% sure those specs won't happen in the next 4 years. They only started doing 4K on their cameras 1yr ago, do you have any idea how long its going to take for them to add 8K???? not to mention there isn't technology available to do that on a mirrorless camera yet.

Canon was the first to introduce 4k Recording on a DSLR, 8 years ago in 2012, on the 1Dc.

 

[Architect1776]

I'm in the later group, and I don't consider what I do "art" because I didn't create what I'm shooting, only how I'm shooting it, just like the audio technician at a recording session isn't creating the music, only capturing it. Why isn't that occupation (which requires no less skill than that of a great photographer) accepted as "art"?

Maybe it's art when I'm shooting a model airplane I built, because I did create that scene.

So painting or drawing anything already made is not art either. No less skill required there as the skill to make an incredible and moving photo. Or a race car driver just pushes the gas pedal like we all do every day, those in NYC and LA probably have more skill than the racer , it is the people that made the car that created the "Art". If there is no financial value to recording music then that is perceived and your fault for choosing a profession given little perceived value as for example grade school teachers as well.

 

[swkitt]

For me the big question is "will the AF tracking be as good as Sony's ? and will we have a human and animal setting for it ?"

 

[Architect1776]

Canon was the first to introduce 4k Recording on a DSLR, 8 years ago in 2012, on the 1Dc.

PS do not let Sony/Nikon fanboys hear this, you will hurt their feelings.

 

[davidhfe]

Believe it or not: I shot many years cameras with only one single film loaded, no safety back-up film possible. Risky times back then, I hardly survived...

There is a difference between a single roll of 36 images and a single card with 10,000. Also, we call this progress.

 

[hmatthes]

Not mentioned, three things needed to have me switch my primary from Leica/SL (my backup is EOS R):
1. Joystick under my thumb
2. Dual cards
3. GPS (Im often away from cell access, thus killing phone GPS.
If so, I'm all over it!