Canon announces more mind blowing specs for the Canon EOS R5

canonmike

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
284
251
Congratulations, Canon Rumor Guy, on your now Canon validated R5 rumor info. Kudos to you. We are going to raise your grades to CR3. You have worked hard all these yrs to get here. Now, sit back and enjoy all the positive feedback. You definitely deserve it.
 

davidhfe

EOS RP
Sep 9, 2015
305
456
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 ).

Ironically, this is exactly what canon is almost always accused of doing with the "nerf hammer"

Edit: Quoted the wrong bit. But the fact remains, canon has been forever accused of removing features in firmware that cameras can support to protect higher end products. Reviewers (and to a lesser degree, the market) have not been kind this this perceived "strategy"
 
Last edited:

Famateur

EOS R
Oct 9, 2012
841
214
Before the moderators (hopefully) move the "I want a stills-only camera" horse-flogging comments to their own thread... :p

Here's a thought to consider that seems to have been missed in the melee: Canon doesn't develop technology for a specific body. Canon develops technology with market needs in mind, with an overall objective of advancing what is possible. Pricing, positioning, differentiation -- all of that becomes relevant when choosing what features go into which bodies and for which target market.

Example: Dual Pixel Auto Focus wasn't developed "for" the EOS 70D. It was developed as a new technology and introduced in the 70D (incidentally, the 70D pleasantly surprised everyone by launching at least $100 lower than most were predicting).

Point: Canon has been developing the Digic X architecture to fulfill a variety of needs, not least among those being data throughput. This opens the door for many features (for both stills and video), regardless of which body(ies) it goes into. The return on that investment of R&D is not being generated only by a single body or the specific bodies that utilize it to its maximum potential. The rising technology tide lifts all models, and the prices of those models combine to provide a return on that collective R&D investment while also positioning specific bodies and feature sets for different segments of the market.

In other words: The price of a stills-only camera will not be lower simply because its feature set doesn't include all the capability that available technology offers. Yes, removing the inexpensive video-centric parts might make it difficult to hack a stills-only camera to use for video, but it won't have any effect on the price because that price (and feature set) is about positioning that particular body to a particular market segment while also distributing general R&D costs across product lines.

It sounds like picPerfect would like a camera with:

  • Moderate sensor resolution
  • High-end sensor design (DR, ISO, etc)
  • Moderate throughput (FPS) using lower-end processing architecture*
  • 5D-like ergonomics and menu
  • Lower Price
Can Canon do that? Sure!

Is it wrong to want this? No!

Does Canon's market research indicate that selling a camera with such a price and feature set will contribute well to net profit? Not so far.

Could that ever change? Sure! If it ever does, we'll see that body! All the reasons why Canon doesn't are just speculation and probably not worth arguing about.

Ultimately, it appears Canon has chosen to forego making a camera body that meets picPerfect's price and feature set desires. None of us really knows why, but it's fairly safe to say that it likely has to do with Canon's decision makers concluding that offering a lower-priced, stills-only body would not be advantageous for the company in the marketplace. One can dream, though, right? :p

Personally, I'm in the camp of "the stills features of the R5 look absolutely splendid, and though I'll likely rarely ever use the video features, I'm eagerly anticipating shooting with this beast and will likely buy it as soon as I've scraped my pennies together!"

* Newer high-throughput architecture would be overkill for the moderate sensor resolution and throughput, right?
 
Apr 22, 2020
2
5
... 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....

I share your concerns with what the price could be, but there is some history in our favor pointing to it being lower. This is not unlike the transition from 5D III to 5D IV. New higher resolution sensor. Improved AF system. Jumping from 1080 to 4K, and now from 4K to 8K. Despite all of those improvements to the 5D IV, the price stayed at $3499. It is at least possible, especially with Canon specifically saying this is in the 5 series family, that they will again come in at $3499.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Famateur

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
Pricing, positioning, differentiation -- all of that becomes relevant when choosing what features go into which bodies and for which target market.
thats all i am interested in. what vametas are they going to give non/video, non-hybrid, stills-only photographers. Everything else is marketing, fanboy and shill's blather.

R5 - no. video centric.
R6 - no. video centric.snd 20 MP in 2020. gimme a break.
R - old sensor, failed Ui experiment.
RP - old sensor, crippled.

now what?
 

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
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.

a little piece of black tape wont cover up the 1000 bucks you paid for unused 8k video specs.
 

davidhfe

EOS RP
Sep 9, 2015
305
456
a little piece of black tape wont cover up the 1000 bucks you paid for unused 8k video specs.
yes. i'll laugh very loud when R5 price leaks. lol.

If the R5 launches around the 5D-series 'typical' price point ($3500 ±200) would you feel that it is not a competitive value proposition on the basis of it's stills features alone? If not, what would you expect to pay for the stills features of the R5?

Edit 1: To clarify, I understand that you're personally advocating for a generally lower spec camera all around. Fewer MP, fewer FPS, worse AF. But to me, the R5 is looking very attractive and competitive if it launches at 'typical' 5D prices.

Edit 2: My math, intro prices USD (year introduced), from wikipedia:
5D - $3299 (2005)
5D2 - $2699 (2008) NB: Didn't realize how attractive the 5D2's price was. That 1080p video sure drove the cost up! ;)
5D3 - $3499 (2012)
5D4 - $3499 (2016)
 
Last edited:

Famateur

EOS R
Oct 9, 2012
841
214
thats all i am interested in. what vametas are they going to give non/video, non-hybrid, stills-only photographers. Everything else is marketing, fanboy and shill's blather.

R5 - no. video centric.
R6 - no. video centric.snd 20 MP in 2020. gimme a break.
R - old sensor, failed Ui experiment.
RP - old sensor, crippled.

now what?

It genuinely sucks to find yourself outside of all of the market segments Canon has defined. It sucks even more if you find yourself outside of all of the market segments any manufacturer has defined. I hope, for your sake, that Canon does decide a stills-only camera is worthwhile.

If I were you, I wouldn't completely lose hope. Here's why:

1. The rising tide really does lift all models. When I bought the 70D what feels like a lifetime ago, it had the 19-point AF system of the 7D. It's not that Canon suddenly decided the 70D was in the same league as the 7D, it was just a matter of differentiation in feature set at the time, and Canon knew the 7DII would have 45 all cross-type points (or whatever it was), and moving the 70D to 19 points helped keep it above the Rebels (among other things). Same with the move from 18MP sensor to 20MP for the 70D. It wasn't better, it's just that it was long due for improvement, and again, the 7DII would have 24MP. Eventually, Canon will probably make a camera that has the stills features you want at a price you want. It will probably have video features, but if you get the still features you want and the price is right, nothing else matters, right?

2. The single-biggest reason I've held off getting a full-frame Canon for this long is that (until the 6DII, I think), Canon didn't put articulating screens on full-frame bodies. Everyone* poo-pooed articulating screens on pro/prosumer bodies back then. I feared it might never happen. Then it did. I opted not to get the 6DII, R or RP for various reasons, but now we have the R5, and I'm doing the happy dance! :p

It might be a long time before Canon sells a camera with the stills features you want at the price you want, but it's bound to happen some day. Don't lose hope.

In the meantime, I'm feverishly saving pennies for the what looks to be a spectacular R5! And I'll use it almost entirely for stills...

* Ironically, it was the video crowd that "legitimized" the articulating screen on a full-frame pro/prosumer body. For that alone, I give them (and Canon) a huge high-five! Even though I use the articulating screen entirely for stills...
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanj

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,488
3,867
Irving, Texas
a little piece of black tape wont cover up the 1000 bucks you paid for unused 8k video specs.
This is what happens when a guy refuses to see reality, when all reason and sensibility is thrown out the window. Good luck. Won't happen, ever. You are starting to embarrass yourself, my friend. There will never be a pure stills MILC or DSLR ever again. I'd say, "Get over it." But more accurately, "Get over yourself." I applaud your passion, but put that passion in a more productive place and take more fantastic stills. You are starting to clog the internet with this dead argument.
 

picperfect

EOS 90D
Mar 29, 2020
112
92
If the R5 launches around the 5D-series 'typical' price point ($3500 ±200) would you feel that it is not a competitive value proposition on the basis of it's stills features alone? If not, what would you expect to pay for the stills features of the R5?

i expect it to come in at 4999 msrp. but lets wait and see. i wont buy video cams. not at 3.5 nor at 5 grand.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SecureGSM

davidhfe

EOS RP
Sep 9, 2015
305
456
i expect it to come in at 4999 msrp. but lets wait and see. i wont buy video cams. not at 3.5 nor at 5 grand.

OK, so that answered neither of my questions. If you're correct that the R5 clocks in at $5K USD I am 100% on board that canon screwed up. (I'd probably still personally buy it!)

But if it launches around $3500:
- Is that an appropriate price for the stills features alone?
- If it is not, what would you expect to pay stills features alone of the R5?
 
  • Like
Reactions: seasonascent

davidhfe

EOS RP
Sep 9, 2015
305
456
i expect it to come in at 4999 msrp. but lets wait and see. i wont buy video cams. not at 3.5 nor at 5 grand.

Actually, a related question. Would you classify the 5D2 as a video camera?

(Another NB: I basically do product research/design for a living, albeit on digital products. I am genuinely curious about your views here)
 

tpatana

EOS 5D Mark IV
Nov 1, 2012
1,546
269
Sony A9ii is $4500.

The question all of you need to ask yourselves is if R5 is better camera than the Sony.

However, for marketing/sales reasons I think Canon will price it just below, probably $3999-$4299.
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
You are saying the cost attributable to video is $1000 and estimate the price of the camera will be $3500-$5000. So the cost of video will be between 29 and 20 per cent of the price of the camera. The video costs are associated with developing, designing and building the camera. Say these costs are 50 per cent of getting the camera into your hands. In other words, you are saying that the costs of video make up 40 to 58 percent of getting the camera to the end of the production line. How did you come up with that?
 

yeahright

EOS 90D
Aug 28, 2014
117
87
You are saying the cost attributable to video is $1000 and estimate the price of the camera will be $3500-$5000. So the cost of video will be between 29 and 20 per cent of the price of the camera. The video costs are associated with developing, designing and building the camera. Say these costs are 50 per cent of getting the camera into your hands. In other words, you are saying that the costs of video make up 40 to 58 percent of getting the camera to the end of the production line. How did you come up with that?
I believe @picperfect views this question purely from the customer side, i.e., her/his side. "I want this stills-only camera with specs perfect for me for a price of 2.000,-. If that camera is made available, I will buy, otherwise I won't." Any aspects on the manufacturer side - market segmentation, development costs, maximizing profit, etc. do not seem to play any part in his/her arguments.
 

canonmike

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
284
251
I share your concerns with what the price could be, but there is some history in our favor pointing to it being lower. This is not unlike the transition from 5D III to 5D IV. New higher resolution sensor. Improved AF system. Jumping from 1080 to 4K, and now from 4K to 8K. Despite all of those improvements to the 5D IV, the price stayed at $3499. It is at least possible, especially with Canon specifically saying this is in the 5 series family, that they will again come in at $3499.
If you are right at $3499 price point and I hope you are, you will see a lot of happy dances going on when R5 gets released. The main question, then becomes, will you be able to actually get one???? I envision cking the on line big box camera stores and seeing the out of stock, okay to backorder box come up. Whatever the price, can't wait to get my hands on one. Appreciate your input.
 
<-- start Taboola -->