A high-megapixel EOS R camera is still on the roadmap [CR2]

[neurorx]

I am surprised someone hasn't suggested the R2 at this point....

 

[Kit Lens Jockey]

Well, keep in mind that the frames per second speed is adjustable. I think on the 1D you can even dial it in to exactly what you want it. But many cameras have had a slow burst and a fast burst for a long time. So if you don't want 12fps, don't use it. Problem solved.

As far as the megapixels, an increase in megapixels has been the most consistent advancement in digital cameras since the very beginning of digital cameras. While it's true that for some users we might be reaching a level where the number of megapixels is "good enough," it would be silly to expect Canon to just abandon any increase in camera resolution, especially when their rivals are still pushing forward with larger and larger numbers.

If photographers are "grumbling" about 30 megapixels or above, sorry, it's time for a new computer and/or memory cards. If you want the latest camera, you have to accept that you'll need the computer and storage to match it. If that's too much for you to handle, you're welcome to keep your old camera.

 

[Stig Nygaard]

Or is Canon abandoning the "targeted niche market" approach and we are about to get cameras differentiated by spec sheets.

At this point I actually think Canon want to show how far they are in mirrorless technology. And they have obviously made great steps forward when it comes to sensor read-out and write-to-card speeds, as demonstrated in 90D/M6II and 1DXIII. So if they can do a 45MP camera shooting 8K RAW video, I think they want to be the first to do it. And I DO think it will be 8K/30p RAW video. It makes sense. Yes, it is more - but not THAT much more - than 5.5K/*60p* RAW video in the 1DXIII.

Quite opposite, talking about "30p" if it refers to timelapse, doesn't make much sense. You can play a timelapse at any fps you decide you want to play it at.

 

[sanj]

Well, keep in mind that the frames per second speed is adjustable. I think on the 1D you can even dial it in to exactly what you want it. But many cameras have had a slow burst and a fast burst for a long time. So if you don't want 12fps, don't use it. Problem solved.

As far as the megapixels, an increase in megapixels has been the most consistent advancement in digital cameras since the very beginning of digital cameras. While it's true that for some users we might be reaching a level where the number of megapixels is "good enough," it would be silly to expect Canon to just abandon any increase in camera resolution, especially when their rivals are still pushing forward with larger and larger numbers.

If photographers are "grumbling" about 30 megapixels or above, sorry, it's time for a new computer and/or memory cards. If you want the latest camera, you have to accept that you'll need the computer and storage to match it. If that's too much for you to handle, you're welcome to keep your old camera.

Perfectly said. Btw has someone actually said they do not want their camera to be able to shoot high fps? I find that difficult to believe. And yes, there are plenty of low megapixel cameras available for anyone who wants those.

 

[ahsanford]

While I agree in general, what I am curious about is how the purpose of each body is going to evolve.

+1. I am curious to see old tropes like 'entry' / 'all-around pro' / 'detail' / 'sports' start to die off for new user bases and use cases.

But if they were going to evolve or change... why immediately snap to the presumed R1 / R5 / R6 familiar structure? Why go with familiar names that parallel existing FF lines if you plan to subdivide / redefine them in the new system?

It's possible (time will tell) that the 1 / 5 / 6 series hierarchy is totally fine as is and Canon just needs to tweak one line or add a unique new one.

- A

 

[Architect1776]

The 5Ds sensor and the 120/250MP sensors Canon showed were all regular sensors, not DPAF sensors. But the 120MP APS-H sensor would correspond to a 200MP FF sensor, so 100MP of dual pixels isn't a stretch. But Canon hasn't shown anything with dual pixel that would exceed 80MP FF.

True, but if they are showing 250 mp so 100 mp with DPAF would still be smaller than 250 mp.
I am sure they can do it.

 

[Dexter75]

I doubt we see a high MP camera this year and the R5 specs are wrong. Unless of course you believe Canon is just going to change decades long behavior and throw all kinds of high end specs into their cameras. Yea, not happening.

 

[ahsanford]

Perfectly said. Btw has someone actually said they do not want their camera to be able to shoot high fps? I find that difficult to believe. And yes, there are plenty of low megapixel cameras available for anyone who wants those.

I don't need high fps myself. For what I shoot, it just generates a boatload more shots to sift through.

2-3x a year I'll shoot some wildlife that I stumble into. A rabbit in the yard, an eagle on a fishing trip, etc. and then I wish I had more FPS. But it's not enough to build my body buying decision around.

(I do rant about FPS, but more from a positioning standpoint. I have long thought the 5D throughput versus other bodies in unexplainable other than via nerf hammer reasons)

- A

 

[davidhfe]

At this point I actually think Canon want to show how far they are in mirrorless technology. And they have obviously made great steps forward when it comes to sensor read-out and write-to-card speeds, as demonstrated in 90D/M6II and 1DXIII. So if they can do a 45MP camera shooting 8K RAW video, I think they want to be the first to do it. And I DO think it will be 8K/30p RAW video. It makes sense. Yes, it is more - but not THAT much more - than 5.5K/*60p* RAW video in the 1DXIII.

Quite opposite, talking about "30p" if it refers to timelapse, doesn't make sense. You can play a timelapse at any fps you want to play it at.

I would NOT expect RAW—been reading a lot of the comments over on EOS HD and folks there have mentioned there's a big difference between 14-bit 45mp and doing a 10 bit 45mp readout for 10bit 4:2:2 video. Full readout, full bit depth w/ DPAF @ 20fps, probably gives some indication of the total ceiling on the system's performance.

Also remember the relationship between the 2K->4K->8K isn't a linear scaling. The "K" refers to the width of the image, so it's scaling as a square. 8K is 4x the pixels of 4K. 5.5K -> 8K is a bigger leap than "just an extra 2.5K pixels"

edit: forgot a "not" in there—whoops

 

[ahsanford]

I doubt we see a high MP camera this year and the R5 specs are wrong. Unless of course you believe Canon is just going to change decades long behavior and throw all kinds of high end specs into their cameras. Yea, not happening.

It's amazing how a bullish CR Guy (confident he's got proper leaks and not hearsay) changed my outlook. I was a firm 'oh, hell no' for the first few days of this, and now if the 5D5 and R5 turned out to be a more-like-the-Canon-we-know 36 MP x 8 fps I would be somewhat gutted.

I am buying into these R5/R6 rumors, but I believe that there will be some wicked fine print that tarnishes otherwise bonkers spec sheets.

- A

 

[davidhfe]

It's amazing how a bullish CR Guy (confident he's got proper leaks and not hearsay) changed my outlook. I was a firm 'oh, hell no' for the first few days of this, and now if the 5D5 and R5 turned out to be a more-like-the-Canon-we-know 36 MP x 8 fps I would be somewhat gutted.

I am buying into these R5/R6 rumors, but I believe that there will be some wicked fine print that tarnishes otherwise bonkers spec sheets.

- A

I can see a lot of fine print on the video specs (especially when you're at 60 and 120fps) but for what matters to me, I don't see how you can nerf 45mp with a 12fps mechanical shutter. All I've ever really wanted was for my 5D4 to hit the speeds of a 7D2. Add in some electronic shutter capability for faster or silent shooting and I can deal with a little rolling shutter or AF asterisks, etc. That stuff is all gravy compared to what's out there.

 

[Gloads]

Assuming $3,500 for the R5, if the R3 (with eye control focus like the EOS 3?) has at least 50% more MP, and the same video performance of the R5, I would pay an additional $1,000 - $1,500 for it. If it does not do 8K/30, I would want a similar price to the R5,and would probably buy both over time.

 

[sanj]

I don't need high fps myself. For what I shoot, it just generates a boatload more shots to sift through.

2-3x a year I'll shoot some wildlife that I stumble into. A rabbit in the yard, an eagle on a fishing trip, etc. and then I wish I had more FPS. But it's not enough to build my body buying decision around.

(I do rant about FPS, but more from a positioning standpoint. I have long thought the 5D throughput versus other bodies in unexplainable other than via nerf hammer reasons)

- A

Dear Ahsanford if you do not want to shoot hi burst, do not! There is a simple setting on the camera. You can set the trigger button to shoot single or low burst or high burst.

 

[sanj]

Assuming $3,500 for the R5, if the R3 (with eye control focus like the EOS 3?) has at least 50% more MP, and the same video performance of the R5, I would pay an additional $1,000 - $1,500 for it. If it does not do 8K/30, I would want a similar price to the R5,and would probably buy both over time.

What R3? Are there rumors to that?

 

[ahsanford]

I can see a lot of fine print on the video specs (especially when you're at 60 and 120fps) but for what matters to me, I don't see how you can nerf 45mp with a 10fps mechanical shutter.

Harder to temper the hotness (I wouldn't say nerf it in this case) with stills on the R5, yes, but it's still possible

• AF asterisks as you said -- Eye AF or tracking AF slowing down the fps
• Less AF customization / selectable areas
• Compressed RAW at highest speeds
• e-shutter machine gun 20 fps mode makes big assumption on what you aren't asking it to do (meter, focus, etc.)
• Reserve high res IBIS multi-shot mode for just the high res body (okay, that would be a nerf)

But yes, 45 x 12 is still bonkers. That alone + IBIS would be an instant upgrade for many 5D4 users were a similarly spec'd 5D5 to surface.

- A

 

[LensFungus]

They should have named the astrophotography camera Canon EOS R2D2. Shame, Canon.

 

[ahsanford]

What R3? Are there rumors to that?

Read the OP, perhaps?

- A

 

[davidhfe]

Harder to temper the hotness (I wouldn't say nerf it in this case) with stills on the R5, yes, but it's still possible

• AF asterisks as you said -- Eye AF or tracking AF slowing down the fps
• Less AF customization / selectable areas
• Compressed RAW at highest speeds
• e-shutter machine gun 20 fps mode makes big assumption on what you aren't asking it to do (meter, focus, etc.)
• Reserve high res IBIS multi-shot mode for just the high res body (okay, that would be a nerf)

But yes, 45 x 12 is still bonkers. That alone + IBIS would be an instant upgrade for many 5D4 users were a similarly spec'd 5D5 to surface.

- A

I would accept pretty much all of those (except the IBIS stuff), assuming there are no caveats up to 12fps. I am not expecting A92 stacked sensor performance on a 45mp "5D" body.

Ugh starting to think I need to reset some expectations here so that I don't get disappointed. Like you, when I first read these specs I though "total bullcrap—no way"

 

[Stig Nygaard]

5.5K -> 8K is a bigger leap than "just an extra 2.5K pixels"

Yes, I know. But don't forget 1DXIII does the 5.5K in *60fps* (12bit) RAW. R5 rumour says 8K in *30fps* RAW.
I DON'T think it will have DPAF in 8K mode. I don't think 1DXIII has that either? Maybe not even contrast AF? And like 1DXIII, probably 12bit.

 

[koenkooi]

Yes they have - 90D / M6 II Wrt pixel density, and with solid DR and noise performance!

M6II scaled up is barely 82MP