Canon announces more mind blowing specs for the Canon EOS R5

[SecureGSM]

How do people still think this is going to be under $3500? You’ve got to be a lunatic to think it’s going to be that price!

People still thinking it would be around US$3,750.00
How’s that sound to you?

 

[Chris.Chapterten]

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.

That sounds good in theory, but most of the work is already done regardless of whether the camera has video or not. The technology is already 'baked in' to the design of the camera, so why not take advantage of it and add the video features. For example 20FPS stills is great! And if that means you can do 30FPS Raw video with the same processor, why not go for it? I love strong video features personally.

 

[SecureGSM]

Are there any rumors about R5 taking photos?

Yeah, there is a shutter button somewhere. Right?

 

[derpderp]

I've used both Sony and Canon recently. I must say that Canon has superior ergonomics, its jpeg images are more pleasing and its RF glass is phenomenal. Sony, on the other hand, has superior AF performance and its video capabilities are/were better.

 

[Ozarker]

It is just not a camera for those only wanting to shoot stills.

Sure it is.

 

[picperfect]

Sure it is.

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).

 

[AccipiterQ]

The 42MP A7RII has been around since 2013 and even gone up to 61MP since then (And PCs have gotten much faster since then to cope with the files), so 45MP is pretty normal for a brand new camera in 2020 (and one made for resolution can go way beyond that) or there is the 20MP R6 where you can complain that the megapixel count is too low - even though the actual difference is not that significant as it will use a newer anti-aliasing filter.
There used to be an option to shoot smaller resolution RAW in previous Canon cameras, but now there is essentially no benefit, so either shoot compressed raw to save file size or use the in-camera crop mode.
Same with the ISO, the 20MP one will be better, but once the 45MP one is downscaled, there is not that much difference.

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?

 

[CSD]

This is a system I built for someone editing/rendering 4k video and sometimes 8k within Da Vinci. excludes things like capture and sound cards but this will likely last for 3-4 years with upgrades.

Part List - AMD Threadripper 3960X, GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, Fractal Design Define XL R2 ATX Full Tower - PCPartPicker

Part List - AMD Threadripper 3960X, GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, Fractal Design Define XL R2 ATX Full Tower

uk.pcpartpicker.com

Avoid anything Intel, and of course Adobe software both are awful for this kind of workload. So that gives you a good idea of a how much a system is likely to going to cost. This system isn't fully tricked out and there is aspects that can be improved.

 

[Freddell]

Continue reading...

Whats the ISO range?

 

[stochasticmotions]

This is the first Canon camera I have actually been excited about since the 5DII came out. Will be a good replacement for the 5DS and 5DIII that have been underused since I got the A7RIV and a great reason not to sell my 500f4 for an ultra expensive sony 600.

 

[Ozarker]

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).

You are wrong with the one sided view. Video and stills optimized. The sports and nature folks will love it. So will portrait and wedding photographers. Last I checked, in the stills world, portrait and wedding photographers are the biggest group. This camera has something for everyone who is looking to buy.

 

[PureClassA]

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).

It's a camera. Period. It will amply satisfy BOTH stills and motion picture shooters. I'm not trying to be rude about this, but what exactly is the ballast here in terms of cost? What physical component of this machine is stuck in for video that is price bloating it?

Remember, this is the Canon Semi-Flagship, 5 Body successor. Or rather, the first NEW breed 5 Body in a MILC world.

The sensor would still be 45MP. The CPU would still be DIGIC X. The buffer would still be massive. The AF/DPAF would still be in there. Dual Card Slots. The menu system, ergonomics, etc... all there just the same for STILLS as VIDEO.

So the video features require an extra set of firmware that already exists for the most part and needs to be tweaked for this particular camera. So what?

And I hate to tell ya, VIDEO pros/people who desire a Canon 5 body as their work horse are NOT a small group. Granted they are not as big as STILLS guys, but they are sizable and growing. I have seen quite a few professional wedding crews film with multiple 5D bodies over the years.

Let's all be happy with this camera! Making it a real hybrid beast is better for everyone because Canon greatly expands its market for this model, which helps keeps the costs down.

 

[Architect1776]

It's a camera. Period. It will amply satisfy BOTH stills and motion picture shooters. I'm not trying to be rude about this, but what exactly is the ballast here in terms of cost? What physical component of this machine is stuck in for video that is price bloating it?

Remember, this is the Canon Semi-Flagship, 5 Body successor. Or rather, the first NEW breed 5 Body in a MILC world.

The sensor would still be 45MP. The CPU would still be DIGIC X. The buffer would still be massive. The AF/DPAF would still be in there. Dual Card Slots. The menu system, ergonomics, etc... all there just the same for STILLS as VIDEO.

So the video features require an extra set of firmware that already exists for the most part and needs to be tweaked for this particular camera. So what?

And I hate to tell ya, VIDEO pros/people who desire a Canon 5 body as their work horse are NOT a small group. Granted they are not as big as STILLS guys, but they are sizable and growing. I have seen quite a few professional wedding crews film with multiple 5D bodies over the years.

Let's all be happy with this camera! Making it a real hybrid beast is better for everyone because Canon greatly expands its market for this model, which helps keeps the costs down.

This camera, if as good as it looks, will substantially enlarge the video pros going to it. So that pool will not be as small as it is today because this camera does what no other in it's class can come close to doing.

 

[picperfect]

The sensor would still be 45MP. The CPU would be DIGIC X. The buffer would still be massive. The AF/DPAF would still be in there. Dual Card Slots. The menu system, ergonomics, etc... all there just the same for STILLS as VIDEO.

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.

VIDEO pros/people who desire a Canon 5 body as their work horse are NOT a small group. Granted they are not as big as STILLS guys, but they are sizable and growing

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.

 

[Ozarker]

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? 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. 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 kuitchen 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.

How would you optimize for stills that a hybrid camera doesn't already accomplish. They have the same resolution and DR considerations.

 

[Stone]

55 is YOUNG! Best wishes...

thank you Sanj! I never thought I'd see this day, my father worked every day of his life for 52 years and died 2 years after retirement. I promised myself and my daughters that I would not follow that path.

 

[BillB]

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.

Product differentiation makes sense when there is enough volume to spread the costs of differentiating the products which means that there has to be enough demand for the differentiated products. Apparently, Canon doesn’t think that is the case.

 

[Stone]

The thing is this: Professionals are not the lion's share that will support the market. They are a niche'. It is well heeled amateurs that support the market. There are far more of them, and for a number of them 8k will be meaningful. I notice you keep asking to see the work of others after they comment. Where is yours? Specifically, where are your videos? Where are your "feature films, whatever." You see, many do video and take photos purely for their own use and enjoyment. They don't need you to approve, disapprove, like, or decide whether or not they decide what they need. Canon obviously knows far more than you or I what the market needs, or will need, in the future. Personally, I like the fact that it appears Canon is getting ahead in the tech dept. That makes the camera a better "investment" and not requiring some to upgrade as soon as they would have. If you don't need it, fine. However, your deciding that others don't and then demanding to see their work so you can have a possible "gotcha" (in your own mind) is just plain rude. BTW: Nobody cares that you retire at 55 except you. That is completely meaningless to the conversation. Some people retire earlier than that (me) and others keep working into old age because they love what they do. Suggesting that people who buy this camera are fools with their money... *sigh* You should learn to respect that others have needs/wants that differ from your own. They don't have to justify that to you or anyone else.

Clearly I've struck a nerve with you, life is too short for internet squabbles. I stated my opinion, you may either accept it or not, others respectfully disagreed with me which I respect. The only point I'll refute is no one cares about my retirement when my mother, daughters & grandson all care about my retirement. Either way, I stated my retirement because I'm proud of myself for doing so and celebrating the fact that I'm not bothered by internet disagreements, they are such a miniscule things in the grander scheme of life. You then proceed to "one up" me by stating you have been even more successful, you clearly care and I thank you for it. I also celebrate your success and being retired younger than myself, you must have worked incredibly hard to do so. I ask to see peoples work because I'm a fan of photography & video, I love to see people envision and create things I've never done or just might not have been talented enough to do so, it's nothing more, nothing less. 10 years on this forum and I've never criticized anyone's interpretation of art, I'm simply a frugal fan.

I am not your antagonist and I will not be, seek easier prey as this is not what you want.

Cheers.....

 

[Mars1954]

Just wondering if they will include at introduction a 64 Gb CFexpress card and reader like they do with the 1DX Mark III

 

[picperfect]

How would you optimize for stills that a hybrid camera doesn't already accomplish. They have the same resolution and DR considerations.

no. While there is a "common ground", hybrid is always a compromise. Optimal parameters for moving images and stills images are not the same. Not for sensor, not for rest of camera.
"Stills optimized" would mean a camera with only basic video-enabled snesor for internal EVF feed [far less than FHD rez, even in today's best EVFs],. devoid of any and things only needed for video/audio capture. Less clutter, streamlined, less complex UI, easier to navigate menu systems. Easier/better weathersealed thanks to less holes for things like mics, speakers, connectors. Lower price and/or money spent on sensor with higher resolution and/or DR specs. And more.