Are two cameras going to replace the Canon EOS R5? [CR]

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
10,810
3,185
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
Sometimes we receive information that seems outlandish at first, but then we take a look at history and the business case and think that there could be something to it. We have been told by an anonymous source that Canon is planning to replace the EOS R5 with two models. This is not unprecedented, as

See full article...
 
This would make sense to me. If the high megapixel camera is 70+ MP that would probably be off putting to a lot of people and probably limit burst speeds or the buffer. Bumping the R5ii to 50mp with current/similar burst rates and then offering a separate camera with much higher resolution but slower burst rates would give a larger group of people what they want vs only one of those two options.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0

davidcl0nel

Canon R5, 17 TSE, RF35+85 IS, RF70-200 4 IS, EF135
Jan 11, 2014
219
95
Berlin
www.flickr.com
I don't get it, how some more or less slightly different camera types is a good thing in a shrinking market. We have already R3 and R8 as numbers, which we never had in the best DSLR time. (1D,5D,5DSR,6D (7D))


45MP is the way for 8K video, so a replacement with 60 or what megapixels has a crop or something a videographer not want....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

john1970

EOS R3
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
984
1,228
Northeastern US
That would be an interesting strategy. Basically, in the next 12 months we anticipate announcements of an EOS R1, EOS R5 Mk2, EOS R5S. Interesting times ahead and I know I will be upgrading my current mirrorless camera(s) in Q4 2023 / Q1 2024. Until then, rumors suggests that Canon is also going to release several RF L-series lenses as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
3,355
4,264
It would be a logical choice for Canon.
One body, two different sensors. Cost saving while meeting a demand for high MP sensors.
Yet, there's still a need for W.A. L lenses. Zooms are not always the solution, with the exception of the RF 28-70 F2...
But I'm patient, and using my Zeiss Classic EFs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,163
12,996
I don't get it, how some more or less slightly different camera types is a good thing in a shrinking market. We have already R3 and R8 as numbers, which we never had in the best DSLR time. (1D,5D,5DSR,6D (7D))
It makes perfect sense. Most of the shrinking is at the low end of the market, where in the DSLR heyday there were many different model series that were updated annually with older ones remaining ‘current’ as cheaper options. The idea was to hit many price points in the largest market segment.

Today, there are a many and growing number of options at the higher end, and far fewer options at the lower end of the market.

Yes, the market is shrinking…but it’s also changing. Number of cameras sold dropped, but the value of cameras sold has increased, the fraction of ILCs with FF sensors has increased relative to APS-C, etc. Canon’s offerings are consistent with the changing market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

davidcl0nel

Canon R5, 17 TSE, RF35+85 IS, RF70-200 4 IS, EF135
Jan 11, 2014
219
95
Berlin
www.flickr.com
many different model series that were updated annually with older ones remaining ‘current’ as cheaper options.
Thats why I didn't say anything about these low end year-models.

But why do you see a increasing market for high end cameras to need double or more full frame bodys than before?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

TonyG

R5
Oct 17, 2022
112
121
Toronto
45MP is the way for 8K video, so a replacement with 60 or what megapixels has a crop or something a videographer not want....
I would be interested in both. A high resolution body like the Sony A7Rv gets crippled very quickly when it comes to read out and shooting speeds when there is so much data to process. I wouldn’t be surprised if an R5s didn’t have any real video features since it would handicap the camera and give a bad user experience.
But for landscape and product photography, that high megapixel count would be a welcomed addition I think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
I'm not sure that I believe this. It's a CR "zero" for me.

A few years ago it would have made very good sense to have 2 versions of the 5 series, i.e. one high res and one for sports, but it seems less relevant now. If indeed we did get hi-res and sports versions, I assume we'd be looking at 90MP and 20fps for the hi-res version, and 45MP and 40fps for the sports version (although that would *seriously* undermine sales of R3). But the R5 can *already* shoot 45MP at 20fps, and I'd already taken it as granted that after 3-4 years Canon would be *capable* of producing a successor with 60MP and 30fps, at a price not much higher than the upcoming Z8.

An alternative pairing, which to me would make more sense, would be to have one stills-oriented version and one video-oriented version. Both would be hybrids, but the emphasis on each would differ markedly. The stills version might be 60MP, 20fps, a *tllting* or Panasonic-style tilt/flippy screen and minimal video-features, while the video version would basically be a R5C Mkii.

But my overall verdict is to take this rumour with a bucketful rather than a pinch of salt. I think we'll just get one model - probably 45MP, 30fps, flippy screen, better AF, some AI "features" and just possibly a new more powerful battery.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Upvote 0
Yes, this would make sense.

Just some of the tech that could/will go in the R5 replacement(s):
- ovf sim viewfinder
- stickier af like the r6 ii
-eye control af like the r3
- an extra front button and stronger/nicer body like the r3 (but no built-in vertical grip)
- more megapixels
- built-in vr processing

You could make a case for splitting the R5ii into an R5ii and an R5iiS. Alternatively you could have an R5ii and then an R1 sibling (R2?) with everything except the vertical grip and bigger battery...or they could keep costs down and make it something like an R6ii S to directly compete with the A7r5.

I could be tempted to remortgage if necessary to buy an R2, especially if it could be programmed to chirp melodically like its sci-fi namesake, but a basic r5ii upgrade with 45mp, ovf sim and better af (like the r6ii) would make a hopefully more affordable camera with more manageable file sizes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,163
12,996
Thats why I didn't say anything about these low end year-models.

But why do you see a increasing market for high end cameras to need double or more full frame bodys than before?
The low end models are relevant, because development resources are finite. In 2012, the average value of an ILC shipped was ¥37400, in 2017 it was ¥49500 and in 2022 it was ¥103000. In other words, the value of cameras being sold has increase dramatically over the past few years. Or look at it from another perspective – in 2012, the total value of ILCs shipped (all Japanese manufacturers) was 714 billion yen, in 2017 it was 578 billion yen, and last year it was 610 billion yen (that's a 47% increase over 2021 even though there was only an 11% increase in the number of ILCs shipped). From a value perspective, the market has recovered.

The takeaway from that is that while the number of cameras sold has dropped dramatically over the last few years, the cost of those cameras has gone up dramatically as well, and from a value standpoint the market has increased in recent years even as the number of cameras sold continued to fall. In other words, high-end cameras now represent a much larger share of the market than they used to.

Choice is important for consumers, and today more of those consumers want high-end cameras (because the smartphone they spent $800-1000 on is their low-end camera). Hypothetically, say Canon can have 6 camera bodies in concurrent, active R&D. When the low end of the market was much bigger, it made sense for Canon to have 4-5 of those 6 models be entry- and mid-level and 1-2 be high end. Today, it makes more sense for 4-5 of them to be mid- to high-end and 1-2 to be entry level. R&D and model diversity should follow expected sales, and high end bodies (and more importantly, high end lenses) are where Canon (and other manufacturers) are placing their bets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

docsmith

CR Pro
Sep 17, 2010
1,237
1,172
This is what I have expected to happen. The high MP “unicorn” was always going to be its own camera. The R5 II was always going to be its own camera, IMO. So, really, the rumor is that the high MP camera is going to be a second version of the R5II, exactly like the 5DRs was.

So Canon was always going to release these two cameras, but is economizing by using the same body. Sounds like Canon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,163
12,996
This is what I have expected to happen. The high MP “unicorn” was always going to be its own camera. The R5 II was always going to be its own camera, IMO. So, really, the rumor is that the high MP camera is going to be a second version of the R5II, exactly like the 5DRs was.
If true, I suspect it also means those hoping for a high MP R1 are in for some disappointment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
Canon was always going to release these two cameras, but is economizing by using the same body. Sounds like Canon.
Sounds like Nikon, sounds like Sony, and sounds like Panasonic too. It clearly makes sense to duplicate as many components as possible in two models. But I still think we'll get one "compromise" model - and that would be even cheaper for Canon than to produce two models.
 
Upvote 0