Canon announces more mind blowing specs for the Canon EOS R5

Fischer

EOS RP
Mar 17, 2020
299
215
re-write this post.

There's been rumors for the last year of a high MP RF camera - so yeah somewhere around 80 to 100MP is the rumors.

(...)

I'm personally waiting for the high res version of this camera, so the R5 is not for me. But it's a damned impressive stills shooting machine.

So am I. But the good news is that Canon will learn from the "R5" as they did from the "R" and that will make the 5RS (or whatever) even better, just as the 5DS/R introduced several of the upgrades that later went into the 5DIV. :D
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,039
783
Davidson, NC
Unfortunately, I doubt Canon would be able to entertain your demands. Even if they cripple the video specs deliberately, they'd still be putting the same high end sensor into the camera, which means the cost savings is probably minimal. That translates to a slightly lower price for the buyer, but not as significant as you might imagine.
I would suspect that the extra costs of maintaining a different product line, packaging, etc., etc., would make the camera less profitable even if they charged the same price. If they charged a bit less for it, they might pick up a few more sales, but hardly enough to cover the extra costs plus the discount.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,039
783
Davidson, NC
It's a new world. We no longer have to completely change systems.

I'm one of the folks who mostly switched to Sony last year. I kept 13 EF lenses, though, and used all of them via the excellent Sigma adapter. Unless the cripple hammer sneaks up in some crazy manner, I'm going to be buying a couple R5s and moving back to Canon bodies. Salivating.
Sounds like the switching process has become a hobby to itself.
 

AEWest

EOS RP
Jan 30, 2020
341
426
no, Canon will not. At least not if you ask most of the forum users here. And no, you are not allowed to even ask. ;-)
I expect every camera coming out will have some basic video capabilities - it is the market we are in.

However, I do expect that there will be a higher resolution R5(S) camera coming within a year that will be more focused on stills and probably won't have 8K video, perhaps only 4K with a crop.

I wonder if there will be an R Mark 2 that has the same sensor as Mark 1 but with IBIS and Af joystick at current R price?That would be a very popular choice for many I think whereas the R6 seems to be 7D replacement.
 

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
I would suspect that the extra costs of maintaining a different product line, packaging, etc., etc., would make the camera less profitable even if they charged the same price. If they charged a bit less for it, they might pick up a few more sales, but hardly enough to cover the extra costs plus the discount.

i don't believe that for 1 minute. A company like Canon that is willing and able to make and sell about 50 different SKUs (including various kit packages) of darn low end crop sensor Rebels, priced between 299 and 899 ... should definitely be able to make 2 or 3 versions of an R5 priced between 2499 and 5999 per body. With and without video capturing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,579
3,978
Irving, Texas
i don't believe that for 1 minute. A company like Canon that is willing and able to make and sell about 50 different SKUs (including various kit packages) of darn low end crop sensor Rebels, priced between 299 and 899 ... should definitely be able to make 2 or 3 versions of an R5 priced between 2499 and 5999 per body. With and without video capturing.
giphy.gif
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,740
1,296
i don't believe that for 1 minute. A company like Canon that is willing and able to make and sell about 50 different SKUs (including various kit packages) of darn low end crop sensor Rebels, priced between 299 and 899 ... should definitely be able to make 2 or 3 versions of an R5 priced between 2499 and 5999 per body. With and without video capturing.

But can they make an R5 with a lower price and lower video specs without said body being firmware hacked to deliver full 8k? Personally I think it's dangerous and stupid for any manufacturer to distinguish based on firmware. It's almost guaranteed to be hacked. And I don't see Canon manufacturing a separate R5 sensor or DIGIC board.

Then again...yes Canon, please ship two R5's. One at a lower price point with all the same hardware but firmware limited video to, say, 4k30. I promise I won't hack it :LOL:
 

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
But can they make an R5 with a lower price and lower video specs without said body being firmware hacked to deliver full 8k? Personally I think it's dangerous and stupid for any manufacturer to distinguish based on firmware. It's almost guaranteed to be hacked. And I don't see Canon manufacturing a separate R5 sensor or DIGIC board.

Then again...yes Canon, please ship two R5's. One at a lower price point with all the same hardware but firmware limited video to, say, 4k30. I promise I won't hack it :LOL:

to my knowledge no Canon 1 series / 1DC was ever hacked. Canon tolerated a bit of Magic Lantern at the lower end, but that was it.

I also advocate some smart "hardware differentiation". No audio amps, no speakers, no mics, no mic jack, no HDMI connector and horror of horrors, no headphone jack on the "pure stills version". Then the hybrid video folks can hack firmware all they want. LOL
 

Doug7131

EOS 7D
Jul 21, 2019
31
103
to my knowledge no Canon 1 series / 1DC was ever hacked. Canon tolerated a bit of Magic Lantern at the lower end, but that was it.

I also advocate some smart "hardware differentiation". No audio amps, no speakers, no mics, no mic jack, no HDMI connector and horror of horrors, no headphone jack on the "pure stills version". Then the hybrid video folks can hack firmware all they want. LOL
Removing the items you listed will reduce the BOM cost of the camera by about 2-3$ max. Making it a utterly pointless excersice. Literally everything in that's needed for video is already going to be in the camera whether you want it or not. Or are you under some impression that 20FPS stills shototing is any different to video other than way the data is ultimatly stored? High speed stills shooting actaully needes more processing power since the camera needs to constaly recalculate the exposure between every shot.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,039
783
Davidson, NC
i don't believe that for 1 minute. A company like Canon that is willing and able to make and sell about 50 different SKUs (including various kit packages) of darn low end crop sensor Rebels, priced between 299 and 899 ... should definitely be able to make 2 or 3 versions of an R5 priced between 2499 and 5999 per body. With and without video capturing.
Of course they are able to do that. I don't know why they would, but yes, if the CEO demanded it in damn the torpedos manner, they could. They supposedly make a lot of their money off Rebels and now the M series. It makes sense to cover a lot of waterfront with them. I bought my first Rebel as an impulse purchase when I went into a store to look at washing machines. I mainly learned from it that I needed a better Rebel to do what I wanted, so I got a T3i and bought more lenses over time. What I wanted to do increased by $10,000+ over the coming years, much of that since I have been coming to this board.
 

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
Removing the items you listed will reduce the BOM cost of the camera by about 2-3$ max. Making it a utterly pointless excersice. Literally everything in that's needed for video is already going to be in the camera whether you want it or not. Or are you under some impression that 20FPS stills shototing is any different to video other than way the data is ultimatly stored? High speed stills shooting actaully needes more processing power since the camera needs to constaly recalculate the exposure between every shot.

all fine and dandy. But the little hardware modifications would very effectively protect against firmware hacks. That way hybrid users could be charged 10000 or 2000 more for the additional functionality over stills only. As should be.
 

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
It makes sense to cover a lot of waterfront with them.

It makes at least as much sense to cover different usage scenarios, capability sets (stills, video, stills+video) and pricepoints between 2499 and 6999 with more than 2 cameras (R5 and 1DX III + future R1 ).
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,039
783
Davidson, NC
A little piece of black tape could cover up the movie camera icon on the dial, and it would be easy to pretend it isn't there. I don't bother to cover it up, and I still manage to ignore it except for the once a year or so I shoot some video.
 
Apr 22, 2020
2
5
all fine and dandy. But the little hardware modifications would very effectively protect against firmware hacks. That way hybrid users could be charged 10000 or 2000 more for the additional functionality over stills only. As should be.

Except, it shouldn't be. You seem to be under the impression that recording video requires some sort of gold plated encoder chip that costs thousands. It doesn't. The cost to make your mythical stills camera is nearly the same as the cost to make the same camera with video. But you don't even have to take my word for it. Canon has already told you. The original 5D cost $3299. With the Mark II, they added all the video functionality and the cost was $3499.

So, that is Canon saying that all of the hardware and R&D to add the complete video solution from scratch costs $200. And that number has only gone down since then as much of the R&D has already been done. And modern mirrorless cameras need more of those video pieces to do the job of taking stills.Even if we stick with the rather high $200 estimate, do you really think anyone would choose the R5G with no video option for $3299 when they could get the R5 with all the video bells and whistles for $3499?

And even if you still cling to this idea of needing a photo only camera, and stubbornly buy that R5G, you are going to lose more than you save in resale, because you are going to have to find another person who has this weird anti-video fetish to sell it to.
 

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,688
1,560
Except, it shouldn't be. You seem to be under the impression that recording video requires some sort of gold plated encoder chip that costs thousands. It doesn't. The cost to make your mythical stills camera is nearly the same as the cost to make the same camera with video. But you don't even have to take my word for it. Canon has already told you. The original 5D cost $3299. With the Mark II, they added all the video functionality and the cost was $3499.

So, that is Canon saying that all of the hardware and R&D to add the complete video solution from scratch costs $200.[..]

I ran the 3299/2005 and 3499/2008 through the top 2 inflation calculators my google search turned up and both agreed that $3300 in 2005 would be $3600+ in 2008 strictly through inflation. If that's true, video actually made the camera cheaper :)
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
It makes at least as much sense to cover different usage scenarios, capability sets (stills, video, stills+video) and pricepoints between 2499 and 6999 with more than 2 cameras (R5 and 1DX III + future R1 ).
where It makes sense to differentiate might depend on the price volume curve among other things.
 

canonmike

EOS R6
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
326
276
Looks like Canon has taken the gloves off and has come out swinging. The more I hear about the R5, the more worried I become that the price will reflect all those awesome specs and come in between $4500-5500.00. On the other hand, perhaps, Canon is going to subsidize market pricing for the R5 and plans on recouping their investment by selling lots of RF glass. Given its promised features, I just don't see this being a $3500.00 camera, I'm afraid. The only reason I could see that low a price happening is if Canon has made a conscious decision to finally make a statement that they are here to stay, stop the defections and increase mirror less market share, suddenly and voraciously. Take that Sony. As a footnote, just look at the You Tube video excitement, one after another, coming from all of the NON-Canon camps. I have been a Canon user since the 1980's and have never seen so much excitement about a product offering. Now, make a believer out of us Canon and take everyone's money. I just hope you are able to supply the demand for what's sure to be the biggest camera offering from a manufacturer, ever. We have long waited for this day.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chris.Chapterten