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

[riker]

No! Just no. Please no! Not again.
I want the return of the times of the 1Ds where the flagship camera had the best resolution and best AF. Now without the mechanical shutter it could also be the fastest (as in FPS) with decreased resolution. I really hate this artificial market where features are carefully selected trying to maximize profit. It has nothing to do with need/demand or technical limitations. It's all a marketing strategy.
After being a Canon lover for 30y I'm slowly becoming a Canon hater.
Sometimes I go the feeling if it was not for the patents, Sony would have already taken over.
I miss the Canon that introduced 5D Mark II so much. Respect forever for that...but now, just rest in peace.

 

[riker]

Me too, but I'm afraid it was only a rumor. The current 24-105 F4 is, in my opinion, a bit disappointing, mostly at 105mm.
But if the F 2,8 ever hits the market, my hopes are it could be optically as good as the 24-70 F2,8...

I'd much more prefer a 24-120/4 like Nikon has.

 

[riker]

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.

Absolutely impossible. There has never been a 5 series upgrade without considerable resolution increase.
Plus, Sony has 60MP since 2019 and 50MP@30 FPS since Jan(!) 2021.
Canon should announce R5m2 60MP@20 FPS, 10MP EVF and seriously better AF TODAY and even that would be too late. (And the R3 being 24MP@30 FPS is just a disgrace.) Oh and eye-control of course, which was already working almost perfectly in film bodies 25y ago!

 

[scyrene]

I predict that AI will be used to enable telephoto images from phones that can't physically get around the optical laws. When that would happen is an excellent question. It would be a good justification for a new phone. Given the exponential change in AI implementation, I would expect it sooner rather than later.
Less likely for APS-C/FF users of course.

It already happens - I forget which model, but there was a phone in the last couple of years that had "moon mode" that was supposedly inserting details it knew the moon had, to make up for the difficulty of getting a good image of it with its camera.

 

[Fischer]

50 MP would be a quite pointless upgrade from 45 MP but I guess some people felt that about going from 20 MP in the R6 to 24 MP in the R6 II.

At least going from 20 MPIX to 24 MPIX was 20% more. But agree that the R6II also disappointed with its MPIX count - and so there's no real telling what Canon will do with the R5II.

 

[scyrene]

I really hate this artificial market where features are carefully selected trying to maximize profit. It has nothing to do with need/demand or technical limitations. It's all a marketing strategy.

Golden age fallacy. This is how it's always been.

 

[Fischer]

As an aside I just want to say that in my opinion CRaw is one of the best innovations ever. Virtually all reviewers have said, and my own experience reflects, that there is little to no penalty for using compressed raw. As sensor resolution keeps moving up, I expect it will become the default choice for most users and I also expect Canon will continue to improve on it, making further compression possible.

Increased CPU and GPU power as well as cheaper storage has superseded CRaw. Doubt even 10% are using it - ever. People would rather have the full power of their RAW files than give it up for some very marginal processing gain. Only times I used Craw was when I was running out of storage space. But large storage cards have taken care of that issue too.

 

[Fischer]

I miss the Canon that introduced 5D Mark II so much. Respect forever for that...but now, just rest in peace.

Best - camera - launch - ever. But that was then. We have moved on since.

 

[Fischer]

Absolutely impossible. There has never been a 5 series upgrade without considerable resolution increase.

Is this a serious comment? 5DII 21 MPIX - 5DIII 22 MPIX - did any camera in any series from any manufacturer have a lower resolution increase?

 

[usern4cr]

Regarding the MP sensor size, I think that it's perfectly fine to have 24MP sensors in the latest cameras. I also think the 45MP size of the R5 is great. When looking at many images I took with my R5, I didn't think that most of them had perfectly sharp focus, but those that did were a joy to behold. I had the impression that a 100MP or so sensor would not give much more useful detail than you'd get with the 45MP sensor. I thought that the pixel shift techinque would prove to be more or less worthless. I also thought that I would hate to store & work with even bigger files.

However, after testing the R5 pixel shift firmware upgrade myself with carefully designed test charts, stable tripod & focusing with stable daylight (not electric light with it's non-continuous nature) I saw for myself that the R5 sensor with a sharp lens (85mm f1.2L) could resolve far beyond what the original R5 did. I was rather shocked at how my "suppositions" of the 45MP being close to a "sweet spot" were wrong, and now I have come to know that sensors like 100MP could indeed produce much better resolution images than 45MP with a good lens if the focus is accurate. While I do take thousands of photos sometimes because it's so easy to do now, I've learned to quickly grade and cull them down to just the good shots and dump all the rest with FastRawViewer. I have seen that the speed of my PhotoLab editing software has increased drastically. I know that the size of storage continues to increase drastically, so that I'm no longer worried about storage. Even when I do tripod ball-stop array panoramas with giga pixel output, I can still edit the huge file in Affinity Photo which was the only post software I know of (admittedly a couple years ago) that could handle enormous files without choking.

If it turns out that the R5 successor has a 90 or 100MP version then I'd probably be very happy to get it now. I hope that the newer technology will still allow it to have a good dynamic range (similar to the R5) since I usually underexpose to avoid highlight burnout and need to recover deep detail in the shadows. I also expect it will have even sharper AF, which will be even more of a joy for me to see!

 

[AlanF]

Increased CPU and GPU power as well as cheaper storage has superseded CRaw. Doubt even 10% are using it - ever. People would rather have the full power of their RAW files than give it up for some very marginal processing gain. Only times I used Craw was when I was running out of storage space. But large storage cards have taken care of that issue too.

Count me in with @unfocused. What evidence do you have that not even 10% are using it?

Should I Use Canon's C-RAW Image File Format?

Are there any reasons not to use Canon's C-RAW image file format? We answer that question.

www.the-digital-picture.com

 

[Kit.]

Increased CPU and GPU power as well as cheaper storage has superseded CRaw. Doubt even 10% are using it - ever.

I think most people here at CR who shoot bursts and don't use JPEG (an JPEG is what R3 is for) use CRAW.

Now, if you use R5 as a landscape camera, you don't need bursts. But if you use it for something like birds in flight....

 

[riker]

Is this a serious comment? 5DII 21 MPIX - 5DIII 22 MPIX - did any camera in any series from any manufacturer have a lower resolution increase?

Haha, OK , u got me there. Still, I hold my point I think it's basically valid.

 

[Del Paso]

Absolutely impossible. There has never been a 5 series upgrade without considerable resolution increase.
Plus, Sony has 60MP since 2019 and 50MP@30 FPS since Jan(!) 2021.
Canon should announce R5m2 60MP@20 FPS, 10MP EVF and seriously better AF TODAY and even that would be too late. (And the R3 being 24MP@30 FPS is just a disgrace.) Oh and eye-control of course, which was already working almost perfectly in film bodies 25y ago!

The R 3 a disgrace? Are you really convinced sports photographers would prefer the slowest workflow possible?

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I don't think that there has been any precedence to have such a lens from Canon. 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 are the standard focal ranges with 24-105/4 being the "walk around" standard focal range.

24-105 MM f/2.8 makes even more sense with the release of the 100-300 f/2.8.
There are many people who would be set with two cameras with one camera having the 24-105 and the other having the 100-300.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

"Pricing and availability aren't known at press time. Meike currently has this lens on display at NABShow 2023 in Las Vegas" [it wasn't] not that I care.

They had the E-mount version of the lens at NAB.
They announced that it was coming for RF.
There was no reason to bring the RF version of the same lens.
They did not bring the Z or L mount versions either.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Maybe an R5 S will have the full frame equivalent of the 90D/R7 sensor? Would that make it around 80MP? You would be able to crop the image to APS-C size if needed and it will have the same MP as the R7.

That is very possible.
However, the R7 is already very slow.
I can't imagine how slow a full-frame version would be.
On the other hand, the a7R V is also very slow.
If it is intended to be used for landscapes and product photography then that might not matter.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Is this a serious comment? 5DII 21 MPIX - 5DIII 22 MPIX - did any camera in any series from any manufacturer have a lower resolution increase?

Yes. 1D X II, 20 MP to 1D X III, 20 MP…zero increase. R6, 26 MP to R6 II, 24 MP…2 MP decrease.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I had the impression that a 100MP or so sensor would not give much more useful detail than you'd get with the 45MP sensor.

That is an easy theory to test now that the R5 has a 400 MP JPEG mode.

 

[koenkooi]

Count me in with @unfocused. What evidence do you have that not even 10% are using it?

Should I Use Canon's C-RAW Image File Format?

Are there any reasons not to use Canon's C-RAW image file format? We answer that question.

www.the-digital-picture.com

I don't have evidence either way, just the observation that cRAW is turned off by default, which means a significant portion of users will ignore it.