Canon’s 2024 Roadmap, and the timeline surprised us [CR3]

[Del Paso]

wow, if the R5ii and the 35 1.2 launch on the same day, my wallet will be getting a lot lighter...

Only if you pay with cash!

 

[perfpix]

Agreed. I do not see how Canon gets the R1 into photographers' hands for the Paris Olympics in July unless they do a very fast formal announcement in May and ship in early June.

I know a photographer who has been to the last 3 Olympics and heading to Paris. He's a Nikon shooter and Nikon has put the latest and greatest into his hands for each one. This year, Sony is sending him their latest as well. I'm pretty sure any high profile Canon shooter will have a pair of R1s in their hands courtesy of Canon in Paris. There will also likely be R1s that can be checked out from CPS at the famous equipment room https://petapixel.com/2021/07/30/in...-stocked-olympic-pro-camera-service-facility/

 

[bbasiaga]

I grabbed a refurb R5 at black friday for $2200 US....looking like a great choice. I'll have it a whole year before mkIIs are on the street, and if i decide to sell I won't lose more than a week or two worth of rental fees. I debated waiting until the II was announced, but that's when I thought it was February.

Brian

 

[danfaz]

Maybe I'm the only photographer that wants to isolate my subject. I guess the rest of you want everything in focus?

No, not everyone. I usually shoot f/1.2-f/2 for individuals.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Maybe I'm the only photographer that wants to isolate my subject. I guess the rest of you want everything in focus? I shoot wide open all the time. This is an uncropped image, shot at 1.2 on the 50mm. I'm not across the room, I'm just up a couple of steps shooting down. But I shoot much closer than this sometimes too. I don't care about the background people in most cases.

Well, the woman with the glasses looking away and the baby she's holding are in sharp focus. The back of the bride's (?) dress is close, just a tiny bit in front of the focal plane. The people she's chatting with who are facing the camera are behind the plane of best focus, clearly. Razor thin DoF is always a challenge. But what matters is if those viewing the images (clients, etc.) are happy with them.

 

[neuroanatomist]

No, not everyone. I usually shoot f/1.2-f/2 for individuals.

I'm typically at f/1.8-2, especially at standard and short tele focal lengths. With the 85/1.2 wide open, unless the subject is looking directly at the camera often only one eye is in sharp focus. That was fun at first, 'because I could' but I ended up stopping down a little and being happier with the results. Using f/2 gives good subject isolation, but the whole face in focus (or narrower, with a longer lens...the 100-300/2.8 is great for portraits!). Using f/1.8-2 most often is why the 28-70/2 replaces a set of primes, for me.

 

[tbgtomcom]

Well, the woman with the glasses looking away and the baby she's holding are in sharp focus. The back of the bride's (?) dress is close, just a tiny bit in front of the focal plane. The people she's chatting with who are facing the camera are behind the plane of best focus, clearly. Razor thin DoF is always a challenge. But what matters is if those viewing the images (clients, etc.) are happy with them.

I chose that one because I didn't want to splash too many people's faces on the platform. The bride was clearly the target and she was twirling around dancing, so overall I thought it came out pretty well. And yes, the client was more than pleased.

 

[Sporgon]

Maybe I'm the only photographer that wants to isolate my subject. I guess the rest of you want everything in focus? I shoot wide open all the time. This is an uncropped image, shot at 1.2 on the 50mm. I'm not across the room, I'm just up a couple of steps shooting down. But I shoot much closer than this sometimes too. I don't care about the background people in most cases.

Can’t argue with what you like, and a few ultra shallow reception shots with just part of the person who’s the focal point of the picture works well, but personally I think that if that image were to be printed in an A3 size book for example, the lack of focus in 99% of the picture spoils the image.

 

[tbgtomcom]

Can’t argue with what you like, and a few ultra shallow reception shots with just part of the person who’s the focal point of the picture works well, but personally I think that if that image were to be printed in an A3 size book for example, the lack of focus in 99% of the picture spoils the image.

Good thing I wasn't shooting for that look then. And if we are all going to shoot exactly the same, then let's just let the camera make all the decisions for us and call it a day. Variety is the spice of life.

 

[frankchn]

It's still relevant since it determines the maximum frame rate the camera can shoot. It's also important for AF since all AF data comes from the sensor. The faster the camera can get access to that data the more time it has to process and act upon it which should improve AF performance.

For those metrics in a global shutter camera, it is probably easier to just look at the maximum frame rate the camera can do with full AE/AF and how high the hit rate is, since it can be bottlenecked by things other than pure readout speed like the AF processing algorithms and such.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Can’t argue with what you like, and a few ultra shallow reception shots with just part of the person who’s the focal point of the picture works well, but personally I think that if that image were to be printed in an A3 size book for example, the lack of focus in 99% of the picture spoils the image.

That was my point as well. To each their own, if I had taken the shot, it would’ve ended up in the digital bin.

 

[tbgtomcom]

That was my point as well. To each their own, if I had taken the shot, it would’ve ended up in the digital bin.

I'd venture that any one of us could easily say that about a lot of photographs that you or any other photographer take.

 

[roby17269]

I'm typically at f/1.8-2, especially at standard and short tele focal lengths. With the 85/1.2 wide open, unless the subject is looking directly at the camera often only one eye is in sharp focus. That was fun at first, 'because I could' but I ended up stopping down a little and being happier with the results. Using f/2 gives good subject isolation, but the whole face in focus (or narrower, with a longer lens...the 100-300/2.8 is great for portraits!). Using f/1.8-2 most often is why the 28-70/2 replaces a set of primes, for me.

I love the wide-open look, and for me it depends on the context:

• fashion shoots: I am typically at f/9-11, partially because all the model needs to be in sharp focus and my 54x40mm MF sensor "reduces" DOF even more thn a FF one... and admittedly also because old-ish MF digital backs are notoriously terrible at focusing, so it's better to leave some leeway
• Landscape: close down as much as possible without incurring in diffraction, light permitting. Unless I am trying to do something artsy fartsy
• Macro: close down as much as possible to avoid having a single butterfly's wing's element in focus
• Kids, family and friends: I usually shoot as wide open as possible because a) it is flattering and b) often the light is low and I do not have a flash and the moments are fleeting (models are more accomodating than my daughter ) - having said so, I have no issues going up to 1.2 when I need, otherwise I am happy to stay 1.6-4
• Video: try to be f/4 or narrower to ease the job of AF, unless there is a special requirement for artsy fartsy stuff

 

[tbgtomcom]

I grabbed a refurb R5 at black friday for $2200 US....looking like a great choice. I'll have it a whole year before mkIIs are on the street, and if i decide to sell I won't lose more than a week or two worth of rental fees. I debated waiting until the II was announced, but that's when I thought it was February.

Brian

I loved the R5 so much I bought a second one. To me, they are 99% perfection. If they put in the firmware to remove the 30 minute record limit my happiness would know no bounds.

 

[danfaz]

I loved the R5 so much I bought a second one. To me, they are 99% perfection. If they put in the firmware to remove the 30 minute record limit my happiness would know no bounds.

Love mine, too! I think the only thing I'd like is a pre-shoot with good buffer.

 

[3kramd5]

I loved the R5 so much I bought a second one. To me, they are 99% perfection. If they put in the firmware to remove the 30 minute record limit my happiness would know no bounds.

Also for chrissake can we dial in an exposure time over 30 seconds without using a bulb? It two thousand and goddamn twenty four.

 

[David - Sydney]

Also for chrissake can we dial in an exposure time over 30 seconds without using a bulb? It two thousand and goddamn twenty four.

Just use the internal intervalometer and you can select virtually any shutter time you like.

 

[David - Sydney]

Actually, I'll likely be sending off my EF 11-24/4L to MPB pretty soon, since the RF 10-20/4L I just ordered is currently out for delivery on a UPS truck.

I recall that you loved the R mount adaptor for adding ND/CPL filters to the EF11-24 to avoid very large front filters. Will this change for you using the RF10-20?

 

[David - Sydney]

Fortunately : it's a Big chance there won't be a global shutter !
When you see all the reviews about the A9III (and as usual, a lot of them are made by paid youtubers pro-Sony), it's awful : this $6000 camera has the worst IQ of any FF camera !
A 15 years back in Time !
The R1 will crush it for IQ.

It is interesting for Sony fans to be on the other foot compared to the R5 overheating scandal.
Canon never promised unlimited 8k record times and ~20 minutes for first recording (slower for subsequent) in first firmware release seemed to be impossible to accept.
Sony promises no reduction in quality but without the asterisks for compared to A9ii at ISO250 etc so it seems to be a broken promise.
The A9iii IQ is probably acceptable in most instances but Sony definitely fluffed their marketing campaign.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I recall that you loved the R mount adaptor for adding ND/CPL filters to the EF11-24 to avoid very large front filters. Will this change for you using the RF10-20?

It will. But when packing for my last trip, I was shoehorning the 11-24 into the bag and strongly considered not bringing it...then considered an upcoming trip where I'll hiking in the Swiss Alps and suddenly the much smaller size and lower weight made a lot of sense. I do still have some pristine 10-stop ND gel pieces, I'll cut one for the RF 10-20/4 and bring it along just in case.

I have the 10-20/4 now, it's amazingly small and light compared to the 11-24/4.