Canon EOS R5 Specifications

davidhfe

CR Pro
Sep 9, 2015
346
518
I see history repeating itself. I remember when everyone was hyping up the EOS R, saying it would be the amazing leap in mirrorless technology that would dethrone Sony.

Canon doesn't need to dethrone Sony, they only need to be competitive, and prevent more customers from switching. They need to match Sony. So far, they have failed in even coming close. Canon is not going to waste a bunch of money designing a camera far better than they need to, while also butchering their own pro flagship DSLR and Cine product lines.

Think about it, guys. Look up the 1DX3 specs and tell me you seriously believe this is even possible in a small MILC body. Be excited for Canon's future, but not delusional.

You are setting yourselves up for perpetual disappointment in Canon.

First off it's a gear rumor site. We're doing this for fun. Second, I've seen MUCH more skepticism than anything else in this thread. We remember the 5D4 firmware rumors all too well.
 
Upvote 0
If it really has FF 8K 30fps RAW mode without asterisks? They could probably get over $4000.

Assuming the 8K is a mistranslation, but the rest is true? More like a 5DSR launch price—$3899. I don't know if exchange rates in Japan have changed. I'd put my money on $3699 or so. But that's if the 20fps electronic shutter doesn't have drastic limitations, and same with the 4K 60/120 models.

If you're looking at crops and autofocus limits and 8 bit modes, etc—then I could see a lower intro price. I think they'll want to keep it a few hundred above the A74 to avoid a price war with Sony.

is it though? as someone else mentioned, 8K30p isn't that much of a heavy lift when the 1DX Mark III does 5.5k60p

Also.. the damn thing needs to process at 8k30 or 8k60p rates anyways for 4K downsampling unless it's using lineskipping, so the RAW is really limited to the card and buffering which if they are using CFExpress - it can handle this.

Talking to Craig this morning (or most of your evening's) and he's pretty confident that the core of the specifications are right.

I don't think 8k30p would necessarily be timelapse or nor would it have to be.

if it does 20 frames per second for stills then it's only 10 fps more to hit that magical 8k RAW.

I recall reading somewhere that canon was going to really "skip" 4K and go right to 8K and I didn't think much of it at the time, but now I'm wondering if that's the truth.

One thing about it - I would expect some kind of firmware updates to the 1DX Mark III to goose it up a bit because it's looking a little pale right now ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
And what's more is I think there's a bias against good equipment in the 'art world' and against knowing how to use it. Kind of a righteous primitivism...
I think you may not be familiar with a lot of photographers who are artists. Edward Weston, Jerry Uelsmann, Andreas Gursky, Minor White, Stephen Shore and Jeff Wall are just a few that come to mind who are or were excellent craftsmen and also world class artists.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 27, 2020
826
1,796
I see history repeating itself. I remember when everyone was hyping up the EOS R, saying it would be the amazing leap in mirrorless technology that would dethrone Sony.

Canon doesn't need to dethrone Sony, they only need to be competitive, and prevent more customers from switching. They need to match Sony. So far, they have failed in even coming close. Canon is not going to waste a bunch of money designing a camera far better than they need to, while also butchering their own pro flagship DSLR and Cine product lines.

Think about it, guys. Look up the 1DX3 specs and tell me you seriously believe this is even possible in a small MILC body. Be excited for Canon's future, but not delusional.

You are setting yourselves up for perpetual disappointment in Canon.
I love when people make definitive statements that Canon is not even close to Sony. Having owned both, I am quite glad they are not. I wouldn't want Sony's inferior color, inferior ergonomics, inferior menus, inferior touch screen functionality, inferior EVF, inferior exposure metering, inferior weather sealing.

So glad my Canon is not equal to Sony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
There none as blind as those who will not see.
The difference between snapshots and actually crafting the scene, composition, colors, etc. Correct me if I am wrong @Lee Jay... you only see snapshots? I can think of portrait sessions where I had to set up the lighting, coordinate colors beforehand, and actually plan what I wanted. It is far more involved than just walking up and snapping. If that's the case, fair enough. We all get to decide what is art in our own worlds. One man's art is another's trash. I actually can't see Warhol or Picasso as artists (there are more). If someone I shot thinks the result is art and wants to frame it, that's good enough for me. :)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Jan 27, 2020
826
1,796
You don't get lower noise from going to lower pixel counts, you get lower noise from going to a larger sensor and preserving the same f-stop.
Had a chance to shoot the same photos with the same settings and same lens using the EOS R in crop mode & with the M5 crop camera. The R in crop mode is just under 12 MP and the M5 is 24 MP. Definitely more noise with the 24 MP camera. Just my real world results. Your results may vary.
 
Upvote 0
You just described all the great photographers whose work hangs in galleries around the world.

Art is very subjective, I do admire and learn from some photographers, but looking at others, all I can say is 'so what...' but they still hang in galleries. Hype, promotion and popularity is a huge contributing factor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Lee Jay

EOS 7D Mark II
Sep 22, 2011
2,250
175
The difference between snapshots and actually crafting the scene, composition, colors, etc. Correct me if I am wrong @Lee Jay... you only see snapshots? I can think of portrait sessions where I had to set up the lighting, coordinate colors beforehand, and actually plan what I wanted. It is far more involved than just walking up and snapping.

If you build everything in the scene, that's art. If there's a person in it (or a plant, or other naturally-occurring object), then it's not, it's craft, skill and technique, like an audio recording technician who creates the acoustics of the room, selects the microphones and their locations, arranges the levels, equalization and effects, records and later mixes the sound. That's a highly-skilled task, but it's not art by my definition.

From wikipedia:

"The three classical branches of art are painting, sculpture and architecture.[3] Music, theatre, film, dance, and other performing arts, as well as literature and other media such as interactive media, are included in a broader definition of the arts.[1][4] Until the 17th century, art referred to any skill or mastery and was not differentiated from crafts or sciences. In modern usage after the 17th century, where aesthetic considerations are paramount, the fine arts are separated and distinguished from acquired skills in general, such as the decorative or applied arts. "

Take a look at this list:

  • Visual arts
    • Two-dimensional works
      • Painting and drawing
      • Mosaics
      • Printmaking
      • Calligraphy
      • Photography
    • Three-dimensional works
      • Architecture
      • Pottery
      • Sculpture
      • Conceptual art
  • Poetry
  • Music
I think it's interesting that all those start with nothing, except photography. Photography starts with some sort of scene. If you create the scene, that's art. If you don't, it's not, at least to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

davidhfe

CR Pro
Sep 9, 2015
346
518
is it though? as someone else mentioned, 8K30p isn't that much of a heavy lift when the 1DX Mark III does 5.5k60p

Also.. the damn thing needs to process at 8k30 or 8k60p rates anyways for 4K downsampling unless it's using lineskipping, so the RAW is really limited to the card and buffering which if they are using CFExpress - it can handle this.

Talking to Craig this morning (or most of your evening's) and he's pretty confident that the core of the specifications are right.

I don't think 8k30p would necessarily be timelapse or nor would it have to be.

if it does 20 frames per second for stills then it's only 10 fps more to hit that magical 8k RAW.

I recall reading somewhere that canon was going to really "skip" 4K and go right to 8K and I didn't think much of it at the time, but now I'm wondering if that's the truth.

One thing about it - I would expect some kind of firmware updates to the 1DX Mark III to goose it up a bit because it's looking a little pale right now ;)

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it. I just think that if Canon puts a real deal FF (or maybe a 45->33MP crop; still way bigger than a super 35 sensor) 8K RAW camera on the market, they can charge whatever they want. The cheapest I could find is $6K "Z CAM" which looks like the sort of camera that needs about $10,000 of additional gear to be usable.

And I bet it doesn't have canon's color science ;)

(https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1496580-REG/z_cam_e2_f8_professional_full_frame_8k.html)
 
Upvote 0

Lee Jay

EOS 7D Mark II
Sep 22, 2011
2,250
175
Had a chance to shoot the same photos with the same settings and same lens using the EOS R in crop mode & with the M5 crop camera. The R in crop mode is just under 12 MP and the M5 is 24 MP. Definitely more noise with the 24 MP camera. Just my real world results. Your results may vary.

Did you normalize?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Jethro

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 14, 2018
996
1,037
The difference between snapshots and actually crafting the scene, composition, colors, etc. Correct me if I am wrong @Lee Jay... you only see snapshots? I can think of portrait sessions where I had to set up the lighting, coordinate colors beforehand, and actually plan what I wanted. It is far more involved than just walking up and snapping. If that's the case, fair enough. We all get to decide what is art in our own worlds. One man's art is another's trash. I actually can't see Warhol or Picasso as artists (there are more). If someone I shot thinks the result is art and wants to frame it, that's good enough for me. :)
But even if you don't set up in a studio that way. You can find a scene in a city street or in nature, and then take the shot with a particular perspective, or to get bokeh effects in the background. These are all 'artistic' effects. Leaving aside the myriad of things that can be done in post (what about photographers that shop hundreds of images together to achieve a finished result?). I don't understand the difference between achieving a desired result with paint and paper as opposed to doing so via a camera.

Which sort of brings us back to: why would you need a camera with a particular MP/ISO profile? Answer - because it achieves the results I'm looking for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

Lee Jay

EOS 7D Mark II
Sep 22, 2011
2,250
175
I don't understand the difference between achieving a desired result with paint and paper as opposed to doing so via a camera.

One is created from the imagination, one is captured from nature. Even though that capture could be done with considerable skill and technique, I wouldn't call it art.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
One is created from the imagination, one is captured from nature. Even though that capture could be done with considerable skill and technique, I wouldn't call it art.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Even if, as it is in your case, that opinion is spectacularly wrong.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: 5 users
Upvote 0
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it. I just think that if Canon puts a real deal FF (or maybe a 45->33MP crop; still way bigger than a super 35 sensor) 8K RAW camera on the market, they can charge whatever they want. The cheapest I could find is $6K "Z CAM" which looks like the sort of camera that needs about $10,000 of additional gear to be usable.

yes, that gives them the ability to charge around 4K for the camera, instead of being caught around Sony's pricing structure.

and that's something that canon would want to do ASAP really.

No one can say, well sony gives you better bang for the buck when this one shoots EIGHT freaking KAY video in raw mode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0