Canon EOS R1 Specifications [CR2]

[mpmark]

Interested to know how you arrived at 1.22 being the correct value, given a 1.5x increase in MP count, without understanding the relevance of taking the square root of 1.5. Google that somewhere? Take a very lucky guess?

there are several ways to get to the same answer. Taking any access of the linear resolution, in this case the long end of the 3:2 sensors for both MPs, 6720/5472=1.22, tada!

 

[neuroanatomist]

there are several ways to get to the same answer. Taking any access of the linear resolution, in this case the long end of the 3:2 sensors for both MPs, 6720/5472=1.22, tada!

Linear thinking...I like that.

 

[mpmark]

Aren't you the same person that said something like "the difference from 30mp on the 5Div to 45mp on the R5 is in many cases irrelevant"?

What's your point? Do you think everyone upgrades a camera just for resolution? I upgraded for animal eye AF over the 5Div, the EVF, the new RF lenses. Was I going to go backwards and get a 20mp R6? or go forward and get a 45mp R5. I shoot wildlife, the AF alone is why i upgraded. If the R1 comes out and has way better AF, THATS why I buy it, the resolution of 30mp is enough for me to care enough.

 

[3kramd5]

there are several ways to get to the same answer. Taking any access of the linear resolution, in this case the long end of the 3:2 sensors for both MPs, 6720/5472=1.22, tada!

Yah, you can do that, but you don't actually need to know the pixel count if you just want to know how it scales. For a rectangle, regardless of its aspect ratio, sqrt(area scaling factor)=the linear scaling factor. Alternately if you want to know how much scaling both linear dimensions will affect area, simply square the linear scaling factor.

 

[EricN]

What's your point? Do you think everyone upgrades a camera just for resolution? I upgraded for animal eye AF over the 5Div, the EVF, the new RF lenses. Was I going to go backwards and get a 20mp R6? or go forward and get a 45mp R5. I shoot wildlife, the AF alone is why i upgraded. If the R1 comes out and has way better AF, THATS why I buy it, the resolution of 30mp is enough for me to care enough.

My apologies, but I don't understand how all your previous statements line up. Why did you mention 45mp as a requirement for jumping on the R1 in a heartbeat and not 30mp?

 

[AlanF]

Yah, you can do that, but you don't actually need to know the pixel count if you just want to know how it scales. For a rectangle, regardless of its aspect ratio, sqrt(area scaling factor)=the linear scaling factor. Alternately if you want to know how much scaling both linear dimensions will affect area, simply square the linear scaling factor.

It requires non-linear thinking to understand all that.

 

[Sporgon]

I'm happy with my RP... I believe that only the US consumers have access to refurbished items - due to favourable return policies that don't exist in other countries.

I was really happy with my RP. I think for someone wanting a small FF camera the form is fantastic, one of the most comfortable cameras I’ve had to hold, with the extension piece, and I’m sure Canon are onto a winner with it and the mark 2 version - the R8.
The problem I had is that I bought it as a small, light camera, but other cameras I have are smaller and lighter. With an adapter or larger lenses the difference in the light(er) weight of the camera body was moot compared with the FFs I have.
Also I found myself being unwittingly drawn into the RF system, an RF lens here, an RF lens there, Canon’s marketing were Sirens to my Odysseus. I’ve had to metaphorically strap myself to the mast to avoid running two mounts as I don’t want (or need) to give up EF.
(But I haven’t sold my adapter)

 

[Quarkcharmed]

Yes, yes he is right, it is 1.25, well it actually is 1.22 to be exact, but its like having a 1.22 teleconverter built in. Having a 30mp sensor, you can crop it by 1.22 and you'd be left with 20MP. Its a fact. Whether someone says its little increase or not, that's their decision.

What on earth is the square root of 1.5 suppose to give you?

It was already explained above in the thread, but it's interesting you didn't bother to actually take a square root of 1.5. Had you done so, you'd see the exact-exact multiplier.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It was already explained above in the thread, but it's interesting you didn't bother to actually take a square root of 1.5. Had you done so, you'd see the exact-exact multiplier.

What about other multipliers? What if one camera has 3 times the number of megapixels? Or 2.6 times as many? To help with that, perhaps someone could make a table of square roots. I bet there's already one on the internet.

Sure enough...I found a square root table.



Ok, so maybe it's more of a cube root table...that would be useful for 3D imaging when comparing resolution of sensors with different MVs (megavoxels).

 

[AlanF]

What about other multipliers? What if one camera has 3 times the number of megapixels? Or 2.6 times as many? To help with that, perhaps someone could make a table of square roots. I bet there's already one on the internet.

Sure enough...I found a square root table.

View attachment 214719

Ok, so maybe it's more of a cube root table...that would be useful for 3D imaging when comparing resolution of sensors with different MVs (megavoxels).

Better still, have a telephoto lens calibrated as a cylindrical slide rule as an extra. Perhaps @InchMetric could help design it.

 

[3kramd5]

Ok, so maybe it's more of a cube root table...that would be useful for 3D imaging when comparing resolution of sensors with different MVs (megavoxels).

Alright, here's a hard right turn, but I had my mind blown by this a while back. 3D Systems is a company that sells 3D printers, but their real end game is developing bio-compatible materials to support human organ transplants. The lattice structure they printed as a support for lung generation using stem cells consists of, and I quote, "44 million individual parts (voxels)." Except, I'm sorry, that was a typo. It's really 44 million with a "T."

44,000,000,000,000 "parts."

3D Systems and United Therapeutics Unveil 3D Printed Lung Scaffold - 3Dnatives

Researchers from United Therapeutics and 3D Systems succeeded in developing a complex 3D-printed human lung scaffold.

www.3dnatives.com

 

[ironfreak]

So the R1 is not flagship. R5 series still remains flagship.

 

[danfaz]

So the R1 is not flagship. R5 series still remains flagship.

Yes, you're correct...if you define flagship soley by megapickles.

 

[neuroanatomist]

So the R1 is not flagship. R5 series still remains flagship.

No. Evidently you can’t count, the flagship is still the 5DsR.

 

[koenkooi]

Yes, you're correct...if you define flagship soley by megapickles.

Isn’t it the ship that has the group commander on board? Will every R1 come with a tiny admiral inside?

 

[danfaz]

Isn’t it the ship that has the group commander on board? Will every R1 come with a tiny admiral inside?

I think you're correct there! Probably why the cost will be high, to pay their salary!

 

[P-visie]

I think you're correct there! Probably why the cost will be high, to pay their salary!

The R5 already has a hotshot, according to the Camera Insider: “EOS R5 Hotshot Comes Lose” (see here).

I’ve looked everywhere for mine, but I can’t find the hotshot that is supposed to come with my R5. Probably shirking to avoid carrying my photo backpack and tripod .

 

[3kramd5]

I’ve looked everywhere for mine, but I can’t find the hotshot that is supposed to come with my R5.

I guess you loosed it.

 

[koenkooi]

The R5 already has a hotshot, according to the Camera Insider: “EOS R5 Hotshot Comes Lose” (see here).

I’ve looked everywhere for mine, but I can’t find the hotshot that is supposed to come with my R5. Probably shirking to avoid carrying my photo backpack and tripod .

If you read the source article, it mentions having both the mirror assembly and the hot sho(t/e) come lose. That is a big indication that the author doesn’t know what ‘mirrorless’ actually means and their 5D had problems.

 

[EricN]

If you read the source article, it mentions having both the mirror assembly and the hot sho(t/e) come lose. That is a big indication that the author doesn’t know what ‘mirrorless’ actually means and their 5D had problems.

I remember that, but I didn't pay a lot of attention since it seemed like it was either completely fiction or too much exaggeration.