Canon officially announces the Canon EOS R system

[amorse]

The devil is in the details and the more details I learn the more I like the system.
AF at f11 so 100-400 f5.6 retains AF at 800mm!
Lens corrections for TS-E lenses
Improved IS performance on EF lenses due to improved sensor feedback.

I saw that also - I was wondering about the potential for an 800mm zoom with functional AF after seeing the EV-6 focusing! That's a pretty interesting proposition, despite the loss in IQ that would likely come with a 2x tele.

There are certainly things to like about it. I could see me using it as a secondary camera to my 5D IV or even as a travel camera if some smaller glass became available. It isn't a huge size savings, but I would certainly notice the difference.
Compared to a 5D IV

2 things I'm still really curious about or this camera:

• AF for fast moving subjects - to be fair I don't shoot it often, but when I do I expect to have success
• How's the weather sealing, and especially with EF glass on adapters - they've used some different language for weather sealing here, and I couldn't see rubber around the adapters so I wonder how it will hold up.

 

[dtaylor]

I disagree with the 'meh' comment generally, I think it's a good release and will be a popular camera. (Although admittedly, I have a video camera for video and have zero desire to record video on an ILC.) But I commented earlier that I might get an R – the 5DsR. As you point out, a gray market copy costs less than the EOS R, and it ticks more of my boxes.

The IQ is incredible. I have no complaints with my Canon setup as a stills system. You would have to go MF to do better.

 

[psolberg]

Also, if I understand correctly - video shooters concerned about the crop can use an EF-S 10-18mm wide lens with the adapter and boom, problem solved. Because the image is ALREADY cropped, you'll still get the wide (16-35) view.

no. not the same. if it was the same, nobody would bother wanting full sensor width video and it wouldn't be present in Sony/Nikon/etc cameras.

 

[bokehmon22]

I also would like to be able to buy a camera with the 5D4 sensor for $1600. Additionally, I'd like be able to buy a mirrorless camera with the 5DS sensor for the same price.

Sony A7III can be had for $1800 with edu discount and better sensor than 5D IV yet I do not want it. If you want Canon strengths, you have to compare it with Canon eco system - 5D IV, 6DII, etc.

 

[Etienne]

the way the sony models and the Z6 do it is they do a full 6K readout without line skipping then downscale it to 4K. There is no such thing as "full sensor" readout in video for those particular cameras as the format for 4k is 16:9. What people mean is full sensor width.

Obviously full sensor readout means reading every pixel and then converting to 4K, or 1080p as required (as virtually everyone in video will understand this), which is what Sony now does. Also obviously, 4K is cropped, almost no one uses 4:3 in video.

 

[dtaylor]

@miketcoolWhat? Over-sampled video the way Sony does it has been produced crisper video, by far, than the Canon method and with less artifacts and less noise. Oversampling improves quality compared to direct read out of the Canon sort.

I'm watching an A7 III review right now and seeing proof that oversampling yields a superior 4k image. Super 35 4k has superior rolling shutter and very good IQ (it's also oversampled), but from this review it appears FF 4k has the best overall IQ on this camera. The gap grows as the ISO goes up.

A Metabones adapter puts the price a bit higher than the EOS R. But an EF-S wide angle puts the R behind again.

Why Canon couldn't you have just given us better video?

 

[miketcool]

Why Canon couldn't you have just given us better video?

Canon did and it ships next month. The EOS R shoots 4K at 10-bit 4.2.2 vs the Sony A7III oversampled 4K at 8-bit. I’ll take the extra dynamic ranger and color data for a midrange digital stills camera.

 

[Perio]

I disagree with the 'meh' comment generally, I think it's a good release and will be a popular camera. (Although admittedly, I have a video camera for video and have zero desire to record video on an ILC.) But I commented earlier that I might get an R – the 5DsR. As you point out, a gray market copy costs less than the EOS R, and it ticks more of my boxes.

Neuro, are you planning to replace your 1DX with 5dsR or you're adding it as a second body?

 

[snappy604]

so far... feels like another luke-warm release. Certainly won't be lining up to pre-order. But will keep eye open on actual real world experience / reviews... never know. Again it feels like you gained some, lost some, but don't really feel ahead somehow.

 

[PGSanta]

As a photography enthusiast, I hate what Canon is doing; I want to decide between the RF system and the Z system relatively soonish.

As a businessman, I think Canon is playing this perfectly.

Canon is the dominant actor, and this release (so close to Nikon’s move) suggests they have multiple options ready to launch. The lenses released with this body suggest as much.

I suspect we’ll see another higher end body in February/March.

 

[razorzec]

I suspect we’ll see another higher end body in February/March.

I think it's logical to expect Canon to roll out an EOS R with 50mp filterless sensor and a Fast action version functionally similar to 1Dx II before the Tokyo 2020 kicks in.

I hope they also roll out a mirrorless successor to 7D II.

 

[bcphoto]

No thanks. Without a built-in tripod, drone rotors and 4 card slots this camera is DOA.

 

[takesome1]

I think it's logical to expect Canon to roll out an EOS R with 50mp filterless sensor and a Fast action version functionally similar to 1Dx II before the Tokyo 2020 kicks in.

I hope they also roll out a mirrorless successor to 7D II.

50mp is very doable.
1Dx II similarity may be abit agessive. The AF will be the main limitation.

 

[CanonGrunt]

The more I think of this camera the more I find it really interesting development from Canon.

It seems to me that this is positioned to compete against the a7III and Z6, but the use of what seems to be the 5D IV sensor is really interesting. Without that sensor (and a few other features to be fair) this seems more akin to a mirrorless 6DII, or a slight re-positioning of the middle of the line offering. One of Canon's videos even suggested that this is a good first full frame camera for buyers, which I took to mean that there will likely be more advanced cameras coming. Now that the 5D sensor has been used in this model, what goes into the next model in this line? Will that be the sensor that goes into a 5DSII (if that were still coming)? Are we talking 50 MP or more? Are we talking a chunkier camera to accept a different battery which can better manage the new power consumption needs? I also noted that this camera gets less shots on EVF than it does on back LCD, so that EVF could have a serious battery demand to maintain a fluid and acceptable response time - I wonder if some of the processing power has been held back to reduce battery drain in order to make LP-E6 viable...

The fact that Canon's "entry level" full frame mirrorless model is positioned in a somewhat more advanced position than the "entry level" DSLR offering (which was released last year) seems to imply a bit of re-jigging of what Canon thinks each market segment will accept, especially considering that a camera like the 6D would not likely be updated again for 3 or more years. I can't help but wonder what led to the decision to give it the 5D IV sensor if they were still confident in the 6DII's sensor at that entry level market position (unless this isn't the entry level market position). Or maybe the manufacturing costs for that sensor have declined and it's more feasible to include now. Interesting to try and read between the lines, never the less.

Honestly, they probably had a bunch of 5D4 sensors lying around. They definitely didn’t sell as many of those cameras as they intended to. The assembly line was already geared for it. Why not put it in? They will have gotten the cost down already, and Canon loves to double dip on it’s tech. And in case it flopped they wouldn’t be out that much, but that is a lovely sensor and definitely gives it a little punch out the gate with that price point.

 

[CanonGrunt]

No thanks. Without a built-in tripod, drone rotors and 4 card slots this camera is DOA.

Or a transformer grip that turns into a gimbal. God, what were they thinking over there?

 

[Colorado]

Sony A7III can be had for $1800 with edu discount and better sensor than 5D IV yet I do not want it. If you want Canon strengths, you have to compare it with Canon eco system - 5D IV, 6DII, etc.

Err, in case the winking smiley didn't make it clear, I was trying to point out that expecting Canon to sell a camera with a sensor from a $3100 camera in a $1600 camera is not realistic. Prices on sensors come down but not that much that quickly.

 

[Respinder]

You need to buy a computer, smartphone, tablet, or computer upgrade part.

Examples: Intel and AMD processors start at the high end, and are progressively crippled to make cheaper products. Many of their low and mid-range products have nearly identical manufacturing costs to their super-expensive manufacturing products; at a minimum, they're cheaper re-designs of higher end architectures. If you like video games, nVidia cards are pretty much the same thing. Do you really think a 1080Ti Founder's Edition costs all that much more than a 1080 to make, or for that matter, a 1070? Do you think an iPhone or iPad with 256GB of storage costs way more to make than one with 64GB of storage?

Instead of "crippling", think of it as this: if they didn't subtract features to make a more attractive price, the only product that would be available is a much more expensive one than you'd probably want to pay, and if you did cough up the cash, you'd be paying for a lot of stuff that you didn't use.

I for one, will always support a company that builds subsets of products at lower prices, over one that provides fewer options. Quite often, I will buy something that is NOT their top of the line, because the price difference from one notch down is huge, while the real benefit to me is marginal. But I'm just fine with the company making more money from someone who is willing to pay the big leap up.

Of course, if there isn't an option that I like, it's not like I have to buy something; I'll just move right along.

When I was thinking about the "additive" vs "subtractive" approach, I specifically thought about cell phones, or more specifically, the iPhone. Whenever Apple introduces a new iPhone, they don't attempt to restrict a key feature from the phone - rather they go all out and try to cram as much as they can into each successive iteration of the phone. Same goes with Apple Watch and any other Apple product for that matter.

Same is true with Nikon and Sony. Sony for sure is using an additive approach, cramming as much tech as they can into their cameras - mostly due to the fact that they were the underdog and had to prove themselves, but even now they continue to put as many features as they can. With Nikon I think its the same thing to be honest - with the D800 they arguably took a huge risk putting a huge MP sensor into a camera like that while putting a lower MP sensor into their flagship D4. But they still went ahead with it and were able to successfully separate the two lines. While the Nikon Z certainly is missing features, I feel it is more due to Nikon's lack of R&D money vs Sony and Canon and them having to focus on specific features versus others.

With Canon, I just feel that there are outright obvious examples where features have been subtracted for no reason. Not having C-log in the 1DX Mark II is the perfect example. How do you justify putting C-log into the 5D Mark IV and now the EOS R - both which have crop and rolling shutter, but you don't put it in the 1DX Mark II which has less crop and less of a rolling shutter problem? Just makes no sense to me.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Neuro, are you planning to replace your 1DX with 5dsR or you're adding it as a second body?

It would be a second body mainly for travel.

 

[Colorado]

When I was thinking about the "additive" vs "subtractive" approach, I specifically thought about cell phones, or more specifically, the iPhone. Whenever Apple introduces a new iPhone, they don't attempt to restrict a key feature from the phone - rather they go all out and try to cram as much as they can into each successive iteration of the phone.

I'm not arguing your point about Canon but I don't think Apple is a good counter example.

Apple is a closed ecosystem, even more so than Canon. There are many features not in a iPhone that are in competitors--for example a head phone jack and removable SD card. They don't include those features because they don't think that they are needed. They have an idea on what the Apple experience is and they don't care if Samsung or another competitor offers features they don't agree are necessary. They are "Apple" and they know what their customers want and need. Canon is much the same way. They don't think IBIS is necessary. The internet commenters think that's BS. They don't really care so long as they get the market share their are hoping for. Since Canon usually dominates any market it enters, expecting them to change is likely wishful thinking.

 

[razorzec]

50mp is very doable.
1Dx II similarity may be abit agessive. The AF will be the main limitation.

I think the AF system found in EOS R is already capable of high speed high precision burst, it's the sensor readout that needs to be improved first.

Canon can slap a couple of Digic 8 sensors on a 1D format mirrorless body and use CFExpress to do the throughput.