Canon EOS R1 Images and Specifications

[neuroanatomist]

But really though, honest question, how does this look compared to any possible A1 successor? It's not a great look.

Honest answer, it doesn’t matter in the real world. The target market comprises owners of Canon 1-series and other high end bodies. I guess you believe the internet implication that comparing cameras across brands is relevant because people switch brands all the time. The data show otherwise. Brand switching occurs mainly with entry level cameras. Canon knows this, even if you don’t.

 

[frankchn]

you mean the A1 isn't a good look? the DR is horrible. even with a heavy handed noise reduction scrub.

The A1 III was released this year, if anything you'd be comparing the R1 Mark II against the A1 Mark IV.

Do you mean the A9III? The A1 is their 50 MP camera, not the GS one. DR seems fine on the A1.

 

[Richard CN]

Honest answer, it doesn’t matter in the real world. The target market comprises owners of Canon 1-series and other high end bodies. I guess you believe the internet implication that comparing cameras across brands is relevant because people switch brands all the time. The data show otherwise. Brand switching occurs mainly with entry level cameras. Canon knows this, even if you don’t.

This camera is for those waiting for a 1 series replacement on the RF mount, those still using the 1DX Mark IV or aspiring to move to the 1 series.

while there is some, there's a silent majority of the people using 1 series cameras aren't discussing them in forums

 

[Richard CN]

Do you mean the A9III? The A1 is their 50 MP camera, not the GS one. DR seems fine on the A1.

Ah my mistake. I don't keep track of inferior brands that much.

 

[walnut]

Do you mean the A9III? The A1 is their 50 MP camera, not the GS one. DR seems fine on the A1.

Yep, nothing wrong with the A1's DR.

 

[Fbimages]

There is a parallel universe where Canon put the R5 ii sensor with cross types points into the R1 body.
Segmentation for the sake of justifying the flagship status and pricing.

 

[Richard CN]

There is a parallel universe where Canon put the R5 ii sensor with cross types points into the R1 body.
Segmentation for the sake of justifying the flagship status and pricing.

Orrrrr it could be that the additional calculation processing of alternating pixels was too much for the smaller camera to handle and heat manage - and it's goal was 8k60p.

sometimes the specifications are picked because of actual real engineering limits.

 

[walnut]

There is a parallel universe where Canon put the R5 ii sensor with cross types points into the R1 body.
Segmentation for the sake of justifying the flagship status and pricing.

That's the universe I want to live in.

 

[Fbimages]

Orrrrr it could be that the additional calculation processing of alternating pixels was too much for the smaller camera to handle and heat manage - and it's goal was 8k60p.

sometimes the specifications are picked because of actual real engineering limits.

Which is why the R1 body size would have been more appropriate!

 

[EOS 4 Life]

The autofocus tricks for sports alone make it worthy.

True, but the R5 II has most of the same features.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Canon could do this, but for now, we believe it's Quad

It is Quad Pixel.
It is exactly what the OM-1 does.
Canon just does it a whole lot better,

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Is it worth upgrading from R3 to R1 ?

No one can answer that for you.
It is your money and your choice.

 

[Richard CN]

It is Quad Pixel.
It is exactly what the OM-1 does.
Canon just does it a whole lot better,

it's cross type. some of the pixels are aligned horizontally, some are aligned vertically.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It is Quad Pixel.

No, it's not. Canon reportedly stated:

This latest technology is a first for Canon and requires a completely new Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor arrangement in which individual Gb pupil divisions of pixels are rotated by 90° to offer autofocus tracking sensitivity along the vertical and horizontal axis of the sensor, offering users fast and accurate results and the ability to capture an image that could have previously been missed.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Segmentation for the sake of justifying the flagship status and pricing.

That would be rather pointless.

 

[Tremotino]

It even will predict what player will actually get the ball if it's kicked towards them. it literally will anticipate a sports play and the result.

but yes, horrible camera.

Wow!!! so R1 is only a revolution for a few soccer game photographers?


Quite disappointed. Hoped at least to see 16bit raw files and an nice bump in DR. Not interested in a R3 mark II. Yes it's a well improved R3 but can't see the gap to a 1 series. I mean, the R3 works damn good!

I hope the other pros are happy with the AF upgrade.

It drives me mad, that the sensor technology of say 5D mark IV of 2016 is still so close to the newst shit we see in the full frame league. Also the other manufactures are not much better.

The improvements form 2004 to 2008 and to 2008 to 2016 where gigantic. Now you may be happy with some less current noise at high ISO..

 

[docsmith]

Order placed, 6:01am. Shipping date listed as 01Nov2024.

View attachment 218254

Have you seen enough to upgrade from the R3? Or is this just a preorder that can be canceled?

 

[docsmith]

Wow!!! so R1 is only a revolution for a few soccer game photographers?


Quite disappointed. Hoped at least to see 16bit raw files and an nice bump in DR. Not interested in a R3 mark II. Yes it's a well improved R3 but can't see the gap.

I hope the other pros are happy with the AF upgrade.

It drives me mad, that the sensor technology of say 5D mark IV of 2016 is still so close to the newst shit we see in the full frame league. Also the other manufactures are not much better.

The improvements form 2004 to 2008 and to 2008 to 2016 where gigantic. Now you may be happy with some less current noise at high ISO..

Welcome to the flatter portion of the technology evolution curve.

This is what it always looks like. Steep "gigantic" improvements that eventually lead to more incremental gains.

 

[Tremotino]

Welcome to the flatter portion of the technology evolution curve.

This is what it always looks like. Steep "gigantic" improvements that eventually lead to more incremental gains.

Yeah that's true!

I have sworn to myself not to buy a new camera if the sensor improvements regarding SNR and DR are only marginal. Otherwise it will only be my GAS and not a real necessity, since I don't need the newest auto focus... Waiting for the next Canon sensor generation. The technology is there just not jet in a R5 or R1...

 

[Deleted member 7828]

As a purely stills shooter I have to admit that the R1, to me, is the more interesting of the two cameras. I was awaiting cross-type AF implementation in MILC - that was the one thing that was needed to fully elevate it above DSLR AF IMO - and likely why Canon waited until now to designate the “R1” although it otherwise seems to be closer to an R3 II if I’m really honest. Hopefully this trickles down, although I don’t see them putting it in an R6 III when the R5 II didn’t inherit this feature.

And yes, disappointingly they’ve seemed to have hit a ceiling mechanically in terms of sensor high ISO capabilities, etc. It’s sounding like current and future advancements are now coming digitally via image manipulation (NR) and AI, so be it I guess.