Canon announces more mind blowing specs for the Canon EOS R5

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
I don't think 45 is normal. Look at the 1dxiii or 5div. I'm not not worried about computing power, it's dynamic range and high iso performance. My point was that if you want something in a more traditional size that takes superior photos, like the 5div, where is the Canon mirrorless option?
Well, there is the Canon R, so the questions would be what do you want that the R doesn’t have and how much would you be willing to pay for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
Well, there is the Canon R, so the questions would be what do you want that the R doesn’t have and how much would you be willing to pay for it.

new sensor, rather than the re-used 5D IV one, DR fully on par with Sony, 35-45 MP, 8 fps fast enough for my use. Plus a regular Canon EOS user interface rather than botched EOS R one; ideally with same "intelligent AF joystick" as in 1DX III. Overall compact form factor, ideally without central VF hump but rather a pop-up EVF (sort of like G5X III on FF steroids). New, same size but higher charge battery. Max. price? € 1999 - without audio/video capture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AccipiterQ

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,261
921
I don't think 45 is normal. Look at the 1dxiii or 5div. I'm not not worried about computing power, it's dynamic range and high iso performance. My point was that if you want something in a more traditional size that takes superior photos, like the 5div, where is the Canon mirrorless option?
The 1DX line is made for speed, not resolution so it can stay at 20MP.
With the 5D 'bloodline' (which is linked to the EOS R and EOS R5) it was 12, 20, 22, 30 and now 45 megapixels in this latest iteration.
And there is no backwards step in dynamic range or ISO in either of them, it is either slightly better or much better.
It is called moving with the times ;)
But if you want less megapixels, you get a camera with less megapixels, whether that is a new model, or just something older.

Not so complicated, although grumbling in forums is still easier, as it is always possible no matter what is coming or when and keyboards are cheap ;)
 

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
CR Pro
Aug 15, 2014
2,123
825
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
Sensor, electronics puieline (bandwidth!) needs a different, more costly layout to handle continued full-bore (8k) video capture. Not to mention extra cooling required. Does not come free of cost, both R&D as well as production cost per unit. Plus all the other hardware, firmware, software items *solely required* for video and audio capture: mics, speakers, audio amps, much more demanding signal processing headphone jack, CF Express slot [and cards, rather than just 2x SD UHS-II], licensing cost for video and audio codecs, bloated menu system (needs to be designed, programmed, tested! not free of cost!), and a whole lot more.

Extra capabilities and functionality always cost extra. There is no free lunch, although video/hybrid minority is pretending there is.



Yes, all fine and well. I have not the slightest problem with R5 specs per se. What irks me for many years now, that majority of stills shooters are *not* given any choice. We do not get any "stills optimized" cameras. Because all manufacturers are only runnign after the darn "we demand 4k/8k video IN EVERY camera" choir. Again, why not multiple versions of a basic camera model? Some fully hybrid, some video-centric, some stills-optimized?

Like with many cars - you can not only select different colors, but also whether it should have a strong or weaker engine, 2- or 4-wheel drive, etc. With camera makers it is as if all car companies would only offer fully blown SUVs. No small cars, no sedans, no regular limousines, no sports cars. Only "everything and the kitchen sink", "hybrid" SUVs. And that state of imaging gear market pisses me off. Especially when majority of stills shooters is forced to subsidize fancy video specs for a small minority who wants them.

The combined sum of a basic (cheap) mic preamp/headphone amp plus the requisite jacks are of minimal costs. I doubt Canon has even $20 in parts (cost) between the two. It's not as if the mic preamps and headphone amps are of high quality in the DSLRs and MILCs. They are just there to receive signals. It's why people who shoot video on these bodies use external mics with their own separate power source and preamps to effectively bypass what's in the camera, otherwise they are recording audio externally in a dedicated device (like my Tascam DR70, which is all of about $199) and using the cheap $5 (if even that much) mic built into the camera purely for scratch audio to sync up to master audio in post. If the camera truly had some serious costs dedicated to physical video components, you'd have an XLR block on these like the cinema cameras with much higher end preamps with 24 bit ADC recording. You'd also have timecode, SDI outputs, etc... all the specific hardware, again, like on the Cinema line.

The speeds and buffer depths and choice of CFExpress and SD are just as valuable for stills. We're talking 45MP here at 14bit RAW for stills. That is a TON of Data to sling at 20fps in electronic shutter mode. I have a 5DSR too. 50MP in 14bit RAW and that camera chokes at 5fps because the shutter and buffer and recording medium of the day just could not crank out any faster.

So the RAW capability on the video side is NOT 14 bit depth. It's going to be 12 or 10bit, like the 1DX3 which uses the same CPU and buffer (we THINK) as this R5. So the stills specs are NOT being bloated to accommodate video. The video (compared to stills) is being drawn down to suit, which still gives us fantastic video results. And if you want to spray bursts of 20fps in 14 bit RAW CR3 files, you BETTER be using that CFExpress slot because SD likely won't be able to keep up for very long ...if at all. Plus, CFEXpress is where things are going, so it only makes sense Canon puts it in this camera, same as the DX3.

SO at the end of the day, Canon hasn't made a "Stills Only" camera since the original 5D. And that isn't changing. It's simply too easy and too cheap to tack on a video feature set (the camera can already accommodate based on it's stills performance) when all the components are already there except for $10-20 in entry level audio parts and some firmware adjustments. So let's say that adds even $200-300 to the retail price? So what. That means Canon can sell maybe 25% more units than if they hadn't done it. Maybe even more than that with this new R5.

Or perhaps I should ask, how much price difference do you believe there would be were there NO video features whatsoever? Also bear in mind that with no video features and, in turn, the smaller potential market, how much would that alter the pricing?
 

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,246
2,133
Kentucky, USA
OVF is good for wildlife, too, because you can observe e.g. a bird nest for hours through your tele lens without draining the battery with every look. Wildlife is 90+ % waiting until something interesting happens. So, with a ML you waste about 90 % of the battery or you may need to carry extra binoculars with you.
For birding you raised a very interesting point I hadn't thought of. If you are spending a very long looking through the OVF or EVF while waiting to take a picture then I would be fairly sure that a good OVF in daylight would be a far superior image to stare at than an EVF. With that said, however, I take that more as a challenge to the EVF makers to improve their displays so that they can equal (or better) the view of an OVF. But for the moment, you are right.

Regarding power consumption, I could see EVF draining more power. Or if they auto-shut off then you'd have an extra delay when you wanted to take a peek at the birds so that they would less convenient. Either way, that would be one more thing an OVF is better at.

Even with this all said, I only want an EVF. I don't want a flippin' mirror. So I'll take what I can get and be glad for the choices I have!
 
Last edited:

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,246
2,133
Kentucky, USA
I fail to see the logic. As a non-video user I really have a hard time understanding why Canon only makes 1 version of R5 and puts their ultimate video specs into it, and at the same time launches C300 III and neither it nor C500 II (FF) at significantly higher prices comes with 8k video specs. Why would anyone buy those C cameras now?

Logic to me would have been multiple versions of a new R camera, all using same body shell. Akin to original Sony A7/S/R product strategy.
e.g.
1. R5C - video-optimized version (similar to what 1DC was) with currently announced 8k hi-end video specs, 4999 MSRP [which would still leave my question re positioning vs. C300/C500 line]
2. R5 - hybrid, "straightforward mirrorfree 5D V", 45+ MP, decent 4k video specs, 3499 MSRP
3. R5R - pure stills "hi-rez" version, 5DS successor, 80 MP, no video recording (only internal EVF feed, no extra cooling, no ), no audio (mics, amps, speakers, codecs), 3499 MSRP
4. R5E - pure stills "economic" version, 45 MP, no video/audio recording; € 2499 MSRP

Maximum production efficiency, optimal choice for customers. It would also nicely demonstrate how few hybrid/video users really are willing to put their wallet where their demands are. :)
I agree with the logic that Canon should come out with multiple versions of the R5, as long as they are all versions of the same camera with things disabled to increase sales. They could have 1 version with everything in it (as the R5 is now), 1 version with all still features and good video (without the most exceptional video features), and 1 version with just the stills features. Each would have a different price. They're all the same camera & menu system. When they do come out with a 85MP sensor they could then do the same thing over again but brand it "version 2" or give it a new R#.

For the record, I take stills almost all of the time. I would much prefer to buy their version that disabled the video if they dropped the price significantly. In fact my preference is to have 2 identical camera bodies with 2 different lenses to that I can go out with just that and not swap lenses. If I got 2 bodies without video I'd save even more money. If I got one of each I'd still save money and the menu system would be identical in each, with the exception that the video menus wouldn't be in one of them. That would be heaven, and Canon would make more money, and those wanting the best video would also benefit. In fact we'd all benefit by having an increased number of bodies (& thus lenses, too) sold which makes Canon more profitable and able to lower their prices.

It would be even better if I decided down the road that I'd like to enable their great video features in my "stills R5" version. I could just pay extra and download the firmware update and then have the "full R5" version at the touch of a button. More money for Canon. Those wanting "good enough" video could save money now, and upgrade later when the stellar video features were more commonplace. Everybody wins!
 
Last edited:

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,654
596
Honestly, what's the Canon camera for those of us that want to take high-quality photos, but that don't want 40MP+ files? Or rather, what WILL it be in the mirrorless line? It seems like this is more of a replacement for the 5DSr, as opposed to a 5DV. All these specs are aimed at people who shoot video, but a DSLR is never going to be able to match their cinema-line of cameras, and with the specs on the r5 it's going to probably not be THAT much cheaper than the lower end cinema products Canon offers. I know people are psyched that shoot video, but why wouldn't you just buy a video camera if that's what you need? I'm genuinely curious. For my part...I just want something that's mirrorless, between ~25 and ~35 MP and is a step up in quality from the original R. Basically a 5DV in mirrorless format. I don't think that's asking much, the use-case for this r5 is going to be pretty close to that of the 5DSr as near as I can tell, as opposed to an every-day unit like the 5DIV or 1DXiii. I can't imagine the dynamic range or low-light performance on the r5 is going to be able to match the 1DXiii or the 5DIV (or even get close)....

Well, let me tell you a bit about my story.

I bought my 5D3 back when it came out...my first ever DSLR. I had been with some friends on a local shoot where the crew there shot with a 5D2.

I was amazed to see what they could do with that and the lenses and the 5D3 was coming out about then.

I seriously bought it just to try to learn to do fairly high end videos.

Over time, I learned more about photography....and went on to be chosen to be on staff for many large New Orleans festivals and I"m now working on other projects.

Hell, I've progressed into MF film shooting recently, but that's another story.

But anyway, I have some disposable cash, but not an endless supply. I'll readily drop $4k-$5K on a camera that I figure gives me the best bang for the buck on video AND stills. I don't want to buy 2 cameras. I actually had been looking to possibly buy into the Blackmagic 6K camera, but was holding off after seeing Canon working on the mirrorless stuff....so, have been biding my time and saving my pickles and dimes.

And I'm hearing these numbers being thrown around, my guess is that it possibly may be as low as about $3999.
I hear folks saying I can't get it if it is over $3500.....and I'm thinking "seriously, is $500 going to make or break your decision on buying what on paper is looking like a game changing camera?"

I mean sure, not everyone has a lot of disposable income, but let's not discard the fact that photography is NOT a cheap hobby or poor mans game...at least not if you're even remotely on the current edge of products.

The nice thing is, the new R5 body, with what I hear is a good quality adapter will work with all our existing EF mount lenses you've invested in over the years.
So, while the body might be a little pricey initially....you don't have to buy into all new glass for it right off to bat.

I'm the type that doesn't tend to buy piddly shit, all the time....I save my money, and once or twice a year, I'll drop a significant chunk of change on something I really like that is high quality and is the best I can possibly afford for said category of item.

Sure, I'd rather spend $3500 on this R5, and if it comes out about that price, I'll do something I rarely do and likely be a pre-order, early buyer.

I usually wait a bit before I test the temp of the water.

If it is $4K or a bit higher, well....I can be patient....and wait to see the reviews....maybe even let the inevitable firmware upgrades come out to fix any perceived 'bugs' that early adopters come across.

But I will get one. My 5D3 is still in great shape...and I'd be happy to keep it as 2nd camera for a long time to come....

But anyway....that's my Canon story....and there's bound to be a lot of varied interests folks like myself, that ARE looking for bang for the buck performance on quality video AND stills.

I am...even tho still photography was a late start for me when I got into this all. It's a big part of me now tho.


HTH,

cayenne
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974 and vjlex

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
CR Pro
Aug 15, 2014
2,123
825
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
I fail to see the logic. As a non-video user I really have a hard time understanding why Canon only makes 1 version of R5 and puts their ultimate video specs into it, and at the same time launches C300 III and neither it nor C500 II (FF) at significantly higher prices comes with 8k video specs. Why would anyone buy those C cameras now?

Two entirely different animal kingdoms here. Relating to my other post, it's a matter of specific design for extremely demanding motion picture needs. The sensors are designed for video, like the Super 35mm in the new C300. Specialized CPUs engineered expressly for motion picture capture. A much broader variety of professional video codecs using various bit depths. More robust RAW options. the full array of powerful Canon Log Gamma options. Ability to use interchangeable lens mounts like PL. Built in high grade glass variable ND filters. Professional grade XLR jacked Mic preamps with independent gain and 48v Phantom Power on board with 24bit/96KHz recording internally. Simultaneous Multi format recording when recording a master in RAW and a side-car with Proxy files for editing and color grading separately in post. SDI, TimeCode, Multi-Monitor outputs... I can go on and on...

Are these features MOST video guys use? If full time pros, then YES. If average semi-pro or hobbyists? Nope.

However, I will guarantee you right now, that you'll have a LOT of C500 Mk2 users and C300 Mk3 users gobble up the R5 because it will compliment those cinema bodies SO SO well as a B cam or for shooting in tight spaces that dont lend themselves to a full sized rig. And that is what a lot of pro users have wanted. It's why you'll find a lot of guys who use the big Sony cameras also carry around an Alpha MILC too.

So yeah, it's an ultimate spec list for a MILC body for sure! BUT, it still can NOT replace what a comparable Cinema camera can do for the professionals using them on a daily basis. The R5, for those guys, will however be one hell of a compliment to their arsenal.
 
Last edited:

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,246
2,133
Kentucky, USA
This is interesting. An actual R5 and a sneak peak on the menu system.


Thank you for posting this!!! Their menu system looks pretty good to me, and I love seeing the fully articulating screen (which is what I must have and is one reason I didn't buy Sony).

I think the R5 will be great enough for me to jump into their system with 1 body and 2 lenses. Then I'll wait for the 85MP body to come out to buy the 2nd body so I can have 2 cameras at the ready and not change lenses.

Yee-haw! Good times!
 
Last edited:

transpo1

EOS RP
Jan 12, 2011
758
104
This is awesome. So happy that Canon is finally including state-of-the-art video features in a stills camera and pushing the envelopes to compete and bypass competitors' video features.

I may be forced to jump into this system and leave my Fuji behind, even though R5 also stands for a system entry price of $5k with a lens plus accessories :)
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,522
5,778
in an ever expanding or sufficiently broad market.

there is a better option than an aggressive discounting in current market conditions.
True, but I was just pointing out that the comment "Maybe. But selling a product below cost isn't exactly good business." isn't actually accurate. Do I think Canon would sell bodies as a loss leader? Not really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
CR Pro
Aug 15, 2014
2,123
825
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
By the way, let's talk about this DUAL GAIN ISO on the C300 MkIII...

We had forum discussion on this a few years back talking about "What IF Canon could readout each diode in the DPAF system at different ISOs to produce some insane DR?" Well... they did it. 16+ stops on that new sensor.

How long before we see that trickle down to the RF MILC bodies? The 1RX next year? A R5 Mk II? Think how nuts that would be??
 

TracerHD

Canon EOS R1 Pro
Aug 22, 2019
37
16
I'm confused about the description:

Be the filmmaker
Commit your best work to stunning 8K video and relish the prospect of exciting new possibilities for creative capture. Offering full sensor width 8K internal and external RAW recording at up to 29.97fps and 4K at up to 119.88fps* in either 4:2:2 10bit Canon Log or 4:2:2 10bit HDR PQ, EOS R5 allows you to fully expand the world of filmmaking and explore dynamic new ways of telling your story.

*External recording is available up to 4K 59.94 fps only

__________________
"full sensor width 8K internal"
"external RAW recording at up to 29.97fps"
"External recording is available up to 4K 59.94 fps only"


nevertheless the R5 sounds amazing!

 

Attachments

  • Screenshot (119).png
    Screenshot (119).png
    495.1 KB · Views: 92

cayenne

EOS R6
CR Pro
Mar 28, 2012
2,654
596
no. It is a video-optimized camera. A lot of video ballast for pure stills shooters and a high price to cross-subsidize the few who will really adequately use 8k video (today and tomorrow).
As someone else on the thread posited, the video portions are largely software related....
And if nothing else, the higher video is likely pushing the hardware so that still photo capabilities are going to be pulled along with it.

Having a stills only camera, for such a niche market, would likely lose the volume sales that help a hybrid camera over time...and make your stills only camera more $$$ since they'd not be selling as many.

And again, as someone else mentioned, the aftermarket for a crippled stills only camera in this day in age would likely be zilch.
 
Last edited:

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
CR Pro
Aug 15, 2014
2,123
825
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
I'm confused about the description:

Be the filmmaker
Commit your best work to stunning 8K video and relish the prospect of exciting new possibilities for creative capture. Offering full sensor width 8K internal and external RAW recording at up to 29.97fps and 4K at up to 119.88fps* in either 4:2:2 10bit Canon Log or 4:2:2 10bit HDR PQ, EOS R5 allows you to fully expand the world of filmmaking and explore dynamic new ways of telling your story.

*External recording is available up to 4K 59.94 fps only

__________________
"full sensor width 8K internal"
"external RAW recording at up to 29.97fps"
"External recording is available up to 4K 59.94 fps only"


nevertheless the R5 sounds amazing!

What part?
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
603
365
OVF is good for wildlife, too, because you can observe e.g. a bird nest for hours through your tele lens without draining the battery with every look. Wildlife is 90+ % waiting until something interesting happens. So, with a ML you waste about 90 % of the battery or you may need to carry extra binoculars with you.
I rather watch wildlife with 10x magnification than try see little details on OVF. Always can buy more batterys :p
I guess other peoples manage sneak more close than me
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanj

David_E

Macrophotography
CR Pro
Sep 12, 2019
214
318
www.flickr.com
I think this
  • Canon shooters - You just struck gold
  • Other shooters -You are fine and shouldn't switch.
  • New shooters - 100% will buy cano
= Canon gets all new growth.
You’re betting that the R5 will put all other camera manufacturers out of business. How much would you like to wager on that? How about this: if, one year after the R5 release, Canon is the only camera manufacturer in the world, I pay for your R5. Otherwise, you pay for my R5.