Canon EOS R5 Specifications

[IcyBergs]

I am super concerned with the lack of gorilla glass in the diopter

No mention of platinum contacts for the hotshoe either

 

[Lee Jay]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Even if, as it is in your case, that opinion is spectacularly wrong.

And yet, I defended my position with logic, while you could only provide a weak insult.

 

[Teknon]

Here come the "This camera is junk - it has a crop at 8k" complaints

 

[vjlex]

If this is true, it’s going to be almost $5k. Add on a high end RF lens and you are looking at around $8k. Yea, no thanks. I’d get a GFX 50s or X1D II instead. Canon is going to price themselves out of the market if they aren’t careful.

I think the EOS R was priced well below what people expected. I think Canon already trusts that people are willing to pay a premium on their lenses, even moreso now with RF. I think they'll probably offer the body at a reasonable price (sub $4K, but probably in the ballpark of the 5D4) to shepherd people into the RF system.

 

[PGSanta]

Yes - people who didn't create the scene they captured, and are thus not artists to me.

I guess it's a good thing the vast majority of people who matter in the field disagree with you.

 

[Dexter75]

I think the EOS R was priced well below what people expected. I think Canon already trusts that people are willing to pay a premium on their lenses, even moreso now with RF. I think they'll probably offer the body at a reasonable price (sub $4K, but probably in the ballpark of the 5D4) to shepherd people into the RF system.

looking at the specs, who thought the R was going to be more than $2400? I thought it was going to be $1500. No IBIS, one card slot, cropped 4K etc...everyone else thought it was overpriced too, which is why it didn’t sell until Canon dropped it to $1200. If the R with its average specs was $2400, you expect that fully loaded R5 with those specs to be anything less than a9 II prices?

 

[unfocused]

And yet, I defended my position with logic, while you could only provide a weak insult.

There was nothing weak about it.

If I honestly thought you were willing to learn, I would be more than happy to engage in a discussion. But, it is quite clear that you are solidly in the "don't confuse me with the facts" camp.

 

[Ozarker]

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.

Very true. Nearly everything I shoot is outdoors... but I am no artist. Some are.

I take it that merely copying a landscape onto a canvas isn't art. Right @LeeJay ? What about the school of painting called photo realism? https://www.theartstory.org/movement/photorealism/

 

[Trout Bum]

Yes - people who didn't create the scene they captured, and are thus not artists to me.

Yes, I think you've expressed your personal opinion clearly and definitely often enough now— in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with the matter. Can we go back to reading comments about the next Canon mirrorless camera now?
Oh wait! Did you hear they've removed all of Vermeer's paintings from the Hermitage? He might have used a camera lucida to complete his compositions. What a phony fake!

 

[felipeolveram]

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. Their lenses are what will bring people back, as long as the bodies are competitive.

Thank you for bringing everyone back to reality, they could only do so much with the size of the 1dx mark iii, even look at how panasonic had to increase the size of the s1 to allow a fan to vent the heat ... chance are this happening is about 2%... I could see them having 4k 60fps but it would have a crop of 2 and no afc in it. imho they're going to cripple this camera ... compare the 1dx mark ii specs to the 5d mark iv... let's get real people and avoid the post hate.

 

[Jethro]

If this is true, it’s going to be almost $5k. Add on a high end RF lens and you are looking at around $8k. Yea, no thanks. I’d get a GFX 50s or X1D II instead. Canon is going to price themselves out of the market if they aren’t careful.

Well, maybe wait and see what the actual price is. If the specs are true, they are pretty much creating a new market.

 

[vjlex]

looking at the specs, who thought the R was going to be more than $2400? I thought it was going to be $1500. No IBIS, one card slot, cropped 4K etc...everyone else thought it was overpriced too, which is why it didn’t sell until Canon dropped it to $1200. If the R with its average specs was $2400, you expect that fully loaded R5 with those specs to be anything less than a9 II prices?

Seriously? I don't know of anyone who expected Canon's first full-frame mirrorless to be less than $2000. I think most people were estimating in the $2500-3200 range as it was very close to 5D4 specs (give or take), but mirrorless.

No, everyone else did not think it was overpriced.

 

[unfocused]

It strikes me from the specs, and the nearly 20 pages of discussion, that this might be a video camera that can shoot stills, rather than a stills camera that can shoot video.

 

[Jethro]

Seriously? I don't know of anyone who expected Canon's first full-frame mirrorless to be less than $2000. I think most people were estimating in the $2500-3200 range as it was very close to 5D4 specs (give or take).

No, everyone else did not think it was overpriced.

And (inevitably) the R was discounted not all that long after release. I recall getting about 25% off. The initial price is for those who Really Want It Straight Away.

 

[vjlex]

And (inevitably) the R was discounted not all that long after release. I recall getting about 25% off. The initial price is for those who Really Want It Straight Away.

The R definitely wasn't worth it for me, but it was still cheaper than I expected. $5k will put this camera out of my reach for a while if not turn me off altogether. If it's sub-$4K, I'll have one before the year is over.

 

[Jethro]

It strikes me from the specs, and the nearly 20 pages of discussion, that this might be a video camera that can shoot stills, rather than a stills camera that can shoot video.

Interesting. I also wonder what the specs say about the other two rumoured R cameras supposed to be coming out this year? If this is the 5Dv-equivalent, then maybe the 5Ds/high MP R will be the more stills-focused version? Which leaves the EOS Rii.

 

[unfocused]

looking at the specs, who thought the R was going to be more than $2400?...everyone else thought it was overpriced too, which is why it didn’t sell until Canon dropped it to $1200.

The R is currently selling for a street price of $1,699. Can you provide some figures to document that "it didn’t sell until Canon dropped it to $1200?"

 

[Jethro]

The R definitely wasn't worth it for me, but it was still cheaper than I expected. $5k will put this camera out of my reach for a while if not turn me off altogether. Sub-$4K, I'll have one before the year is over.

The (discounted) R was fine for me, because I had been thinking about jumping to the 5Div anyway. I wouldn't be in the market for the R5 immediately, but it will tell us (i) what they can do with the new digic on mirrorless, (ii) what IBIS is going to be like and (iii) what the new generation sensors look like. All this means something in relation to the other R bodies to come - including the (more affordable from my point of view) EOS Rii.

 

[deleteme]

I disagree. A good app is a plus, but just wireless tethering would be great.

Yes, but any app that Canon has made so far is a miserable waste of code.
As they aren't distributing SDKs as far as I know the likelihood of getting improved functionality on any front is grim.
IMO if any manufacturer offered functionality and ease of use approaching CamRanger, they would immediately capture a ton of pros and enthusiasts needing this product.
Wireless tehtering sounds fine but we are talking about RAW files over WiFi. Can be done, but the pain is not worth it unless you are shooting one image, pausing for 3 minutes and thinking about the setup before shooting again. Few are that patient.

 

[reefroamer]

It will shoot 8K during winter only to avoid excess heating

No worries, its going to come with DFE ... dual fire extinguisher.