I agree. Canon seems to have a new sensor for every new camera they release. But somehow each of those new sensors are about the same as the ones they replace. I would bet that the new sensor for this camera will be a modest improvement if any in DR and noise performance but will definitely include DPAF.I think this pretty much says it all: new sensor design REQUIRED.
Interesting point about sales of one camera funding the development of another. From that perspective it would make sense to introduce a camera at the 5DIV level with dual slots, joystick, etc. as this should be a good seller. Ultra high 60MP resolution camera would certainly not bring in as many sales... as least I wouldn't think so anyway.Canon wasn't embarrassed by Nikon. Nikon stated they were getting rid of the lower end of their lines so you have probably seen the bulk of Nikons camera line going forward. Canon released a mid level full frame and lots of people compare it to the absolute top of the line from every one so they can knock it. For the people that say Canon doesn't innovate, Canon is #5 on this list, Sony is #11 and Sony is spread out across far more industries. Are Canon cameras bleeding edge? No. But they tend to just work.
What Canon did do with the release of the EOS R and R lenses in particular is state we are in it to win it. The goal going forward in the near term is going to be getting people buying R lenses. A 5D mkV equivalent is more likely to do that than some thing niche like a 5DSR II equivalent for that reason. I also think you need the sales of the lower end 5D to help pay for the development of the 5DSR. So I suspect you will see a 5D before a 5DSR but that is just a guess.
Well I have to differ with you in that - I don't think they needed to put out a world-beating sensor for their first FF MILC, and the 5D4 sensor is by most accounts good. The R line is offering other things - slightly smaller size, new options for lenses, etc. But the 5Ds(R) sensor is an older generation tha the 5D4's, with some concomitant limitations (though it is still excellent), and I don't think it would be worth Canon's time to simply plop it into an R-style body at this point. Especially given that its primary customers (so people say - I'm atypical in using it for general purpose/wildlife) are studio and landscape/architecture folk, for whom a smaller body is much less compelling.I said the same thing about EOS R before it launched. I just wanted to see a step forward in sensor tech and not a 5DIV sensor. Not saying it's a bad sensor, it's just nothing new or exciting. Canon is not afraid of using old tech in new cameras. Look at 6DII and now EOS R. Based on these last two releases, I seriously doubt they will have a new sensor for a 5DSR mirrorless equivalent. I hope I'm wrong, but it doesn't seem likely.
Yes they can and why should they? Because DSLRs are still a big seller. It's pretty basic business. You're off topic anyhow but chasing pros and 'advanced amateurs' is not how Canon maintains its market dominance.Other than the 1D x Mark III and perhaps the APS-C lines (90D and 7D mark III, etc...), I don't see any reason for Canon to invest in the DSLR business. They need to focus all their resources on catching up and passing Sony. Otherwise they will be confined to an also-ran category. They already invested heavily in a new mount system, the R and they need to build a new lens portfolio worthy of a pro and advanced amateur interest. They can't chase both DSLR and mirrorless at the same time.
Heh. And there's me, going back to the 5D3 from the 5Ds because it's almost as good most of the time and I don't need the huge file sizes! My pics must be terrible taken with such antiquated equipmentCan't understand some of these people. Most of them don't even own the gear they bemoan. On the other hand, everyone knows a camera can't take good photos once new tech comes onto the market.