Its basically the Sony-killer for combo (video and photo) shooters.Wow. So this is obviously not the EOS RS. It's not the EOS R ii. Exactly what is it?? Same sensor as the 1D X III?
Based on sensor resolution alone it seems like the R5 - R6 team very closely resembles the Nikon Z7 - Z6 combo. I recently bought the Z6 because it has what I want and it uses all my Canon lenses perfectly with an adapter. If the R6 has the low light capabilities of the Z6 it will be a huge success, and I may sell my Z6 which I only bought for the auto focus-stack capabilities. I am prepared to pre-order the R5 right now because I sold my 5D3 and I am now stuck with only the 5DSR, 7D2, Pentax K-1, and a Nikon Z6.Or it is rumoured low light body. Which could be really good. If there are no drawbacks like one cards slot etc, then R5 together with R6 would be perfect kit for wedding photographer. R6 for low light and maybe faster in terms of readout (better silent shutter) and R5 for portraits etc. Sounds really good to me
As I already wrote in different thread, I was told by canon marketing guy, that this year we will see high mpx body and low light body. Based on the R5 and R6 specs I m startung to trust more what he said. But he might be wrong, I admit that. But I really widh, he was telling truth. Would be really great wedding combo...Based on sensor resolution alone it seems like the R5 - R6 team very closely resembles the Nikon Z7 - Z6 combo. I recently bought the Z6 because it has what I want and it uses all my Canon lenses perfectly with an adapter. If the R6 has the low light capabilities of the Z6 it will be a huge success, and I may sell my Z6 which I only bought for the auto focus-stack capabilities. I am prepared to pre-order the R5 right now because I sold my 5D3 and I am now stuck with only the 5DSR, 7D2, Pentax K-1, and a Nikon Z6.
Because physics? What a snide BS response.Of what "that"? Of decreased DR at base ISO?
Because physics. Global shutter is not some sort of LCD filter in front of the sensor. It's a set of gates that allow photoelectrons to flow from the potential well in the photoelectron-collecting part of a pixel to the potential well of the same (or greater) capacity in the non-photoelectron-collecting part of the same pixel.
Have you read what was written after, or did mentioning of physics just shut your brain?Because physics? What a snide BS response.
No, it has a mechanical rolling shutter (why do you think there is X-sync shutter speed)? It's just that the mechanical shutter is much faster than the electronic one.Your camera has always had a global shutter for photos.
Do you have any idea how it physically happens, given the limited data bandwidth between the sensor and the rest of the camera? Or... because magic?"Global shutter" merely means that the sensor is read for an exposure of the entire sensor such that the top of the frame is exposed at the same time as the bottom of the frame.
There were no such claim. There is no problem to make a sensor with an intentionally decreased quantum efficiency if needed.My reference to the electronic ND was a solution to your claim that there would be too much light in the case of the global shutter,
I had to (BARF) watch the first few mins of that video to see if he really said that.... YUP. He did.What do you think on the idea by Tony Northrup that eos R6 will be like the Panasonics S1H camera with similar of price range , around 5000$?
I do hope It will not be the case.
Obviously the R6 name suggests a 6D level camera, but at the same time the specs don't yell 6D to me.Seems like there's two price camps.Although kind of 70/30. I cannot believe that the 5/6 naming and correlating price structure will be any different with mirror or without. Seems it's the A7Ss killer people that think that somehow it will be more expensive. Hmmmm....Everyone else (the 70%) reads the R6 as lower everything. A mirrorless 6D2 to it's 5D4 compadre.
We'd never, ever, EVER hear the end of "cripple hammer" puling if Canon did this.Also a question out of left field: would it be possible for Canon to produce a line (or lines) of cameras with the same bodies and internals and use features in firmware to differentiate them? That would enable large economies of scale for Canon. If a user wanted to upgrade, they could pay for the next level firmware. So if I paid for the R7, but wanted to get the video features of the R6 or R5, I'd upgrade it's firmware and it would be "unlocked". Or maybe pay for an upgrade to unlock some more fps? Or a higher resolution EVF? Probably an idea that has been explored and debunked already, but with MILCs this may be much more doable now.
Obviously the R6 name suggests a 6D level camera, but at the same time the specs don't yell 6D to me.
My speculation is:
R5 will be the 5D level mirrorless camera. I'm a little surprised it will jump all the way to 45 MP, but if it has a C-RAW mode at about 30 MP that should satisfy anyone who doesn't want larger files. I think (similar to what others have said), there will be caveats to a number of the specs we have seen, eg 12 FPS mechanical shutter / 20 FPS electronic shutter will have focus and quite probably exposure locked at the first frame. Wiith AF and AE, I reckon the FPS will drop to something around the 7 FPS which the 5D IV does now (which will be a step up the 4.3 FPS the 5D IV does in live view, even before accounting for the increased resolution), maybe closer to 10 FPS if we are lucky. I don't do video so I am not across details but my guess is it will do very good video but there will be compromises there somewhere, eg 8K will be timelapse, 4K120 will be for a short burst only, and there may be limitations even on the other 4K modes (eg no DPAF - that might be trade off against having full frame 4K on a 45 MP sensor). It will probably have a tilt/flip screen (although maybe not) and will be an excellent allrounder, with plenty of resolution, but it won't be anything like as fast as the 1Dx III and it won't track fast, erratically moving subjects as well as the 1Dx III. It will offer something to attract 5D IV and R owners, as well as competing with the Nikon Z7, Nikon D850 and to some extent the Sony A7R IV.
R6 will be aimed at video on a budget (compared to cinema cameras, etc), eg for vloggers. It will definitely have a tilt/flip screen, and even though it won't boast 8K in its specs, it will have better video capabilities somehow than the R5 (eg DPAF even in 4K - although perhaps not 4K60 since I don't think the 1Dx III will have that?), perhaps better codecs, perhaps better ability to connect to external recorders. So far as stills go, it will be very similar to the R5 (eg same FPS limitations as the R5) but with the much lower resolution. The lower res sensor will be marketed as better for low light - but the extent to which it really is better will have to tested in due course. It will sit a bit below the R5 in price, but if Canon goes high with the video capabilities, and includes things like 2 card slots, I think it will be aimed more at the Sony A7S line (or perhaps just be a new line of its own), rather than a camera meant to sit at the 6D level.
So, if R5 and R6 are along the lines of my speculation, there is room at the top for both a seriously high res camera (R3, R5s, whatever) and a 1-series R camera in due course. There may also be room for a 6D level camera below the R6 in due course, say a year or so after the R5 and R6 (similar to how 6D cameras have followed 5D cameras), with resolution between the R6 and R5 but more limited video capabilities than the R6, and perhaps different ergonomics and a single card slot. For the time being though, if you want an R series camera but you don't want to pay for an R5 or R6, your option at about the 6D level will be the current EOS R (which will drop to around 6D II price). Oh, and I think the RP line will continue separately, with the focus being very much on small size - a bit like the 100D/200D line of DSLR cameras.
The other option is the R6 is basically just an R5 with a lower resolution sensor (a bit like what I understand Nikon has done with the Z6 and Z7). That could mean it is meant to be the 6D equivalent in the mirrorless line ... but to me 20 MP seems too low for that, especially when the Nikon Z6 and most recent Sony A7 series camera have 24 MP, I believe, and the 6D II has 26 MP and the 5D IV and R have 30 MP. Yes the R6 would still bring some things to the table, and yes a few MP doesn't really make that much practical difference most of the time, but from a marketing perspective I would have thought they would go higher with the MP. I guess one possible answer might be thatCanon wants to put one of its latest generation sensors in there without having to develop a new one so it has simply re-used the 1Dx III sensor ... so they could do that, perhaps give the R6 one card slot, etc, and place the R6 as the 6D level camera despite it being 20 MP. But, well, I still think 20 MP is too low for that, unless perhaps the R6 is quite a bit cheaper than I expect it to be.
OK, that's my 2 cents Will be interesting to see what Canon gives us!!
Ah OK, well, either (A) I didn't appreciate C-RAW was necessarily full resolution and what I wrote about that didn't make a lot of sense, or (B) I meant Canon should introduce a reduced resolution C-RAW in the R5 (even though if they were going to introduce a reduced resolution mode you would think being able to save it the full RAW file would make more sense!). Hhhmmm, I think I'll say I meant (B) ... and you're all going to believe me, right?None of the .cr3 cameras have a reduced resolution raw mode. C-RAW is full resolution but uses slightly lossy compression to reduce file size (like options Nikon and Sony have been offering for a while). If they offer a reduced resolution raw output for the R5, it will be the first of the .cr3 cameras to have any such thing.
While I agree that there'd be a small subset of people who'd be "outraged" and would attempt to hack their cameras to unlock all of the features, I'd point to the number of people who have - or rather haven't - downloaded and installed Magic Lantern. If it's not particularly easy and results in a voided warranty, I think that the vast majority of people would pay for the upgrades, and that would be enough to make it worthwhile. Especially if Canon made it really easy e.g. connect the camera directly to WiFi, and pay for and install the upgrades directly. Think as easy as installing a new app on Android/iOS, and people would do it. A kind of Canon app store. This is the reason Netflix exists, they made it easy enough for people to get content, and so torrenting is much less prevalent now than a few years ago (stats from Aus backs this up, we used to be the worst!).We'd never, ever, EVER hear the end of "cripple hammer" puling if Canon did this.
Also, it could be hacked, and Canon would be out huge money, since self-righteous people thinking Canon has no right to "cripple" their cameras would just get them hacked.
I could see whoever doing this shooting themselves in the foot.MILCs make this possible. We see it now with new firmwares providing new features, I'd like to see it applied across familes of cameras. It seems kind of inevitable to me and I wonder who is going to do it first?