The Canon EOS R5 will begin shipping before the Summer Olympics

David_E

Macrophotography
Sep 12, 2019
67
80
www.flickr.com
I don't suppose you believe that participation in a photography rumour forum web site is someones career, including myself. This is a rumor webs site. we cannot be certain of things here.. Now, being a CIA asset, you would have no trouble to get a background on what my day job is, experience, competencies and skills.
Personally, I believe that you should not be publicly vocal about who do you work for. My employer certainly would not appreciate me doing that. Aren't you under a confidentiality agreement of some sort? You just made a direct association of yourself as in your personal life with your employer and you did not have to.
I personally believe, that you should remove the photo from the post. This is isn't strictly appropriate place for this.
CIA officers are called just that: officers. Not assets, not agents. Agents, aka assets, are foreign nationals that CIA case officers recruit to provide intelligence or perform other services.

Your curriculum vitae? Wouldn't know where to start. Linkedin? Facebook? I worked against foreign nations, not American photographers.

Publicly vocal: That's a retirement medallion! I retired 26 years ago.

Confidentiality agreement: I applied to have my cover lifted when I retired and my application was approved. I carry an official ID card identifying me as a CIA retiree. Gets me a discount at hotels. My confidentiality agreement concerns sources and methods, operations, and colleagues. That I worked for the CIA more than a quarter century ago is not a secret.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbb34 and slclick

StoicalEtcher

EOS RP
Jan 3, 2018
257
161
Yorkshire
They wouldn't be plugged in in massive quantities, they'd just come down the conveyor, get plugged in and the file would be downloaded and flashed, then the next would come down the conveyor and the same plug would plug into the next one... There might be a few stations so that multiple copies are done at the same time, but there would be absolutely no need to do them all simultaneously.
I doubt Canon does it on the same scale they did with the T90 back in the day, which did only have a single production run, but based on what a lot of us hear, they still do batches in bulk, especially for product introductions. They realize more than most consumer electronic companies that impulse sales are most likely when the new model has just been introduced and that the longer a product is on the market, the less attractive it is to impulse buyers.
Fair enough - but this assumes they are lying around, ready but, I guess, not yet boxed up (?) and then get updated before packing for shipping. While I agree this is something along the lines that will happen, I guess I was still coming at it from the suggestion that there could be million(s) of cameras held in stock, amounting to circa $2.4Bn, awaiting update and despatch (it was the likely quantum I was questioning).

I agree entirely with your views on impulse purchases.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:

reef58

EOS RP
Apr 16, 2016
250
151
To me it's all vaporware. After the 1DXMKIII being such a disappointment for us "low life" still sports shooters.... I don't think Canon is anywhere near a professional body that will show a marked improvement in IQ with an OVF. Canon pushing the MKIII for the Olympics is almost laughable. It's a very modest "still" improvement and to be considered and upgrade is insulting.

The IQ is horrible, the color rendition is flat and muddled, definition lacks, noise in shadows at moderate and low ISO show clear green and purple, DR is very poor in contrasting areas, the ovf focus points when using single-point are hard to see, the awb is off to such an extent on some settings that we felt there must be an upgrade or firmware fix or something coming, the reader the camera came with does not work, wi-fi and communications protocols are not intuitive, the scrolling menus are nice but static, shooting mode should have large easy to read and responsive indicators in the VF well lit. Canon got the 1DXMKIII so wrong and it's buggy with some lenses, strobes and flashes, Now we want to talk a bout "another" pro body??? How about they get the one that came out a few days ago right first??????

Frustrating seeing promos, marketing and rumors to boots interest or sales in a future camera(s) when others are left baffled at what Canon is doing "Today" in "Reality" where we expected a "flagship" that was supposed to be a marked upgrade for still sports photographers. How do you not improve IQ???????
I am going to disagree with you on this. I have faced challenging shooting conditions, and haven't really shot anything I am proud to publish, but the 1dx3 files look pretty good. I will try and post some in the coming weeks. I found the af points readily visible, and actually and surprisingly the card reader works fine. I have not tried the communications settings. I will say the live view still shooting is slick. It is super fast and accurate. I am waiting on my Zacuto large frame mount and I will be set.

I haven't used it enough to proclaim it is super duper but my initial impressions are much different than yours.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

RunAndGun

EOS RP
Dec 16, 2011
355
41
Thinking about it, the one place this camera makes no sense is the Olympics. Unless there is somehow no lag in the EVF, it will not work well for sports. Unless it can somehow focus while recording 8k video, it will not work well for sports. For ceremonies, or other more static situations it should be great, but for most of the action, not so much.

Does anyone know of pro sports shooters who use MILC bodies for action?
I’m curious of the reasoning behind this. We don’t have optical VF’s on “TV” cameras. They’re all electronic. NFL Films guys have been largely shooting on Amira’s for years, now, which have EVF’s. All those super tight, super slow-mo replays you see on TV are from video cameras with EVF’s.

Now, I’m not saying I know anything about the performance of the R5’s EVF, but just because it’s an EVF doesn’t necessarily make it unsuitable for and preclude it from being able to shoot sports. If that were the case, well, no one would be watching sports on TV.

I’d also make the argument, that if using the electronic shutter doesn’t have any negative consequences vs. the physical/mechanical shutter(like skew, other RS artifacts), then sports shooter should rejoice, because now the VF image is no longer blacked-out during exposure. When shooting with a traditional DSLR how often and for how long is their no image in the VF during a typical “rip” of images? I haven’t shot with a mirrorless like this, so I don’t know, but I’d have to imagine that even using the physical shutter, there’s probably (at least a little) less black-out time, even then, since there is no longer a mirror having to me moved in and out of place, either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanj

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,931
1,066
in what way? exposure certainly is not sensor size related.

I mean my Sekonic light meter does not give a hoot what camera is in my hands or even what focal range of the lens that is attached to that camera.
all i need to know is ISO and F-number and/ or Shutter speed.
Bokeh? yes, I get that.
Depth of Field, which, though related, is not the same thing as "bokeh".
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,931
1,066
Has Canon ever managed to make a 300/2.0 lens, though (required to be an equivalent to 600/4 here)? I thought, only Nikon was making them.
1582489111804.png


But you've got it backwards. A FF 600mm f/4 lens would be "equivalent" to a 300mm f/2 lens on a Micro Four-Thirds camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sharlin

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
1,931
1,066
I’m curious of the reasoning behind this. We don’t have optical VF’s on “TV” cameras. They’re all electronic. NFL Films guys have been largely shooting on Amira’s for years, now, which have EVF’s. All those super tight, super slow-mo replays you see on TV are from video cameras with EVF’s.

Now, I’m not saying I know anything about the performance of the R5’s EVF, but just because it’s an EVF doesn’t necessarily make it unsuitable for and preclude it from being able to shoot sports. If that were the case, well, no one would be watching sports on TV.

I’d also make the argument, that if using the electronic shutter doesn’t have any negative consequences vs. the physical/mechanical shutter(like skew, other RS artifacts), then sports shooter should rejoice, because now the VF image is no longer blacked-out during exposure. When shooting with a traditional DSLR how often and for how long is their no image in the VF during a typical “rip” of images? I haven’t shot with a mirrorless like this, so I don’t know, but I’d have to imagine that even using the physical shutter, there’s probably (at least a little) less black-out time, even then, since there is no longer a mirror having to me moved in and out of place, either.
Video cameras record frames continuously. There's no need to time an exact moment and press the shutter button just the right amount of microseconds in advance as there is with still imaging. Plus, we've all seen the super-slow-mo playback where the football is just short of the goal line and the runner's foot is still in the air in one video frame and in the next video frame both the football has broken the plane of the goalline and the foot has landed out of bounds. There's no way to tell from that video which happened first: the ball breaking the plane or the foot touching out of bounds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gloads

RunAndGun

EOS RP
Dec 16, 2011
355
41
1) Video cameras record frames continuously. There's no need to time an exact moment and press the shutter button just the right amount of microseconds in advance as there is with still imaging. 2) Plus, we've all seen the super-slow-mo playback where the football is just short of the goal line and the runner's foot is still in the air in one video frame and in the next video frame both the football has broken the plane of the goalline and the foot has landed out of bounds. There's no way to tell from that video which happened first: the ball breaking the plane or the foot touching out of bounds.
1) That argument may have held some water 20 years ago, but not today. Still cameras are doing almost the same thing today with the high frame rates that they're capable of running. Most pro still sports shooters just hold down the shutter during a play and sort it out later. I see the guys going through their images in the media work room post game and it's almost like watching a video when some of them scroll through their images. Don't misinterpret what I'm saying. I'm not saying a lot of those guys don't have the eye and instincts but let's not pretend that the camera doesn't play a huge roll in capturing that decisive moment.

2) That is tied to the frame rate that they're recording. Was it 60fps? 120fps? 1000fps? The higher the frame rate, the more likely you are to capture any given "moment". Or are you trying to say that a still photographer with an optical VF would get the frame between those two frames, instead, because they would have been able to hit the shutter at the right microsecond to capture that frame?
 

yeahright

EOS T7i
Aug 28, 2014
58
26
I must confess I haven't read through all 15 pages of this thread, so I don't know if that has been brought up yet in the discussion about EVF lag, and I don't know the actual numbers (maybe someone can help out):
Isn't the additional time required to mechanically lift the mirror after pressing the shutter release a much higher disadvantage of the DSLR than the viewfinder lag in mirrorless? After all, the time that passes from when the action happens to when the image is starting to be recorded is reaction time + mirror up in a DSLR, and viewfinder lag + reaction time in a DSLM
 

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
1,209
867
Turku, Finland
I must confess I haven't read through all 15 pages of this thread, so I don't know if that has been brought up yet in the discussion about EVF lag, and I don't know the actual numbers (maybe someone can help out):
Isn't the additional time required to mechanically lift the mirror after pressing the shutter release a much higher disadvantage of the DSLR than the viewfinder lag in mirrorless? After all, the time that passes from when the action happens to when the image is starting to be recorded is reaction time + mirror up in a DSLR, and viewfinder lag + reaction time in a DSLM
The mirror lag is, crucially, not a part of a control–feedback cycle, whereas EVF lag is. In other words, mirror lag does not affect your ability to track a subject, but EVF lag does because there’s a latency between adjustment and feedback. Besides, pro body mirrors are damn fast at getting out of the way, until very recent times quite a bit faster than the readout times of electronic shutters. Remember that physical shutters still comfortably beat CMOS e-shutters in speed!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

yeahright

EOS T7i
Aug 28, 2014
58
26
The mirror lag is, crucially, not a part of a control–feedback cycle, whereas EVF lag is. In other words, mirror lag does not affect your ability to track a subject, but EVF lag does because there’s a latency between adjustment and feedback. Besides, pro body mirrors are damn fast at getting out of the way, until very recent times quite a bit faster than the readout times of electronic shutters. Remember that physical shutters still comfortably beat CMOS e-shutters in speed!
the mirror lag may not be in the angular tracking control loop, but it is in the timing control loop, when it's about 'capturing the moment'.
 

Kit.

EOR R
Apr 25, 2011
1,700
1,049
I must confess I haven't read through all 15 pages of this thread, so I don't know if that has been brought up yet in the discussion about EVF lag, and I don't know the actual numbers (maybe someone can help out):
Isn't the additional time required to mechanically lift the mirror after pressing the shutter release a much higher disadvantage of the DSLR than the viewfinder lag in mirrorless?
We were talking about shutter lag in DSLRs an mirrorless, and there are links with the numbers. The short answer is no, it isn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,752
678
Think how everyone is taking this R5 excitment

And who is “Everyone”? There is no such a thing as unified camera users or photographers collective or universal opinion. Interesting though.
From an acting Enterprise Sales Executive POV, Canon hit the ball out of the park with R5 and R6 there is no question about it. They managed me to be wanting 2 Of those and at least 3 lenses. that’s what makes Canon a great company: delivering products that are relevant and highly sought after by photographers.
 

wyotex43n

I'm New Here
Jan 24, 2016
19
11
Change of subject but has there been anymore rumors on the APC. R7? The canon rumors newsletter mentioned it but I see nothing on the site/
 

mpmark

EOS 80D
Aug 9, 2016
127
141
And who is “Everyone”? There is no such a thing as unified camera users or photographers collective or universal opinion. Interesting though.
From an acting Enterprise Sales Executive POV, Canon hit the ball out of the park with R5 and R6 there is no question about it. They managed me to be wanting 2 Of those and at least 3 lenses. that’s what makes Canon a great company: delivering products that are relevant and highly sought after by photographers.
its a joke, time to relax my friend and not be so serious.