Canon EOS R5 Mark II to arrive before EOS R1? [CR2]

[entoman]

If so, they'll charge at least $7,999 for it. Maybe more.

I don't think they'd get away with charging that much. Even affluent enthusiasts would probably baulk at that. Nikon's continued aggressive pricing and highly competitive products will ultimately cause Canon to rethink their pricing policy. But they'll still be more expensive than Nikon.

By the time the R1 is launched, the Z9 will be over 2 years old and the Z9 Mkii will be undergoing field tests. The price of the original Z9 will probably have dropped to around £3700, and the R3 will have dropped to about £4500. So I'd expect the R1 to be under £6000.

Global shutter? Probably not. But it will have a very fast readout that virtually eliminates rolling shutter effect.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

But bear in mind that manufacturers need to make money for their employees and shareholders, and they can make a great deal more money by launching new products, than by plodding on with old models that have new firmware.

It is not only that but they also need to have new model numbers in retail stores even if there are not really any substantial changes.
Although, the number of stores with camera sections is dwindling.
I am not sure that new models make much of a difference in dedicated camera stores or online.
Stores like Walmart, Target, and Best Buy have moved their camera sales online.
Canon and Sony could always rent shelf space in those stores but they are choosing not to.
Meanwhile, Fuji is killing it with Instax cameras.
Instax cameras are sold just about everywhere.

 

[entoman]

In the initial release, the limiting logic was only based on timers, and did not depend on the temperature sensors at all.

Nevertheless, the *reason* for having the time limit was to avoid overheating.

 

[neuroanatomist]

So I'd expect the R1 to be under £6000.

Global shutter? Probably not. But it will have a very fast readout that virtually eliminates rolling shutter effect.

I think the R1's sensor innovation will be quad-pixel AF.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

What is your personal opinion? Do you think the Mark II will add for example in terms of image quality, dynamic range and AF precision better results than the current R5?

My personal opinion is to take a look at the R5 C since you have documentary listed first.
There would be no harm in waiting for the R5 II though.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

By the time the R1 is launched, the Z9 will be over 2 years old and the Z9 Mkii will be undergoing field tests.

I do not think so.
The development announcement of the Z 9 was not until after the a1 was released*.
I think Nikon will wait until after the R1 before they plan the Z 9 II.

*Nikon uses Sony sensors so they kind of did have to wait anyway.

 

[entoman]

It is not only that but they also need to have new model numbers in retail stores even if there are not really any substantial changes.
Although, the number of stores with camera sections is dwindling.
I am not sure that new models make much of a difference in dedicated camera stores or online.
Stores like Walmart, Target, and Best Buy have moved their camera sales online.
Canon and Sony could always rent shelf space in those stores but they are choosing not to.
Meanwhile, Fuji is killing it with Instax cameras.
Instax cameras are sold just about everywhere.

My response the @Juppeck was to his comment "I would wish if the manufacturers would try a little more with the firmware in order to give the systems a slightly longer lifespan on the market".

I think we were both only talking in terms of enthusiast and high-end products (do Instax cameras even have firmware updates?).

Do stores like Walmart, Target and Best Buy sell high-end cameras? In the UK most enthusiast and hi-end cameras are sold on-line via photographic specialists (Wex, Park Cameras, London Camera Exchange and grey importers).

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Do stores like Walmart, Target and Best Buy sell high-end cameras? In the UK most enthusiast and hi-end cameras are sold on-line via photographic specialists (Wex, Park Cameras, London Camera Exchange and grey importers).

They definitely do online.
I bought my R3 from Best Buy.

 

[scyrene]

I don't think they'd get away with charging that much. Even affluent enthusiasts would probably baulk at that. Nikon's continued aggressive pricing and highly competitive products will ultimately cause Canon to rethink their pricing policy. But they'll still be more expensive than Nikon.

Until and unless Nikon start gaining market share, I doubt very much Canon will feel any pressure from them in that regard; Nikon has to be aggressive with pricing and features because they are desperate to claw back what they have haemorrhaged.

 

[neuroanatomist]

They definitely do online.
I bought my R3 from Best Buy.

Best Buy is often overlooked. For new higher end products (e.g. L-series lenses) that are heavily preordered at B&H/Adorama/Canon, I often them see them briefly in stock at Best Buy.

 

[Maximilian]

Thanks Max.
I could wait up to 6 months IF (!) it is worth it to wait. Do you think, beside the high price tag (compared to the actual R5), that the Mark II will add indeed enough and new bells to justify the purchase? Or better to stay to the actual R5?

Sorry, I cannot answer that question if it will get much better.
I suppose that @entoman did a quite good prognosis here.

I can make a guess about the release date:
I'd guess that the R5 II will take longer than 6 months, but that's just my 2 ct.

 

[Czardoom]

Good morning all. I need a reccomandation. I own a Canon R5 and several RF lenses (15-35 f2,8, 24-70 f2,8, 70-200 f2,8, 85 f1,2, 100-500 f7,1). As I do documentary, travel and street photography, I have come to the conclusion that rather than buy a RF 24-105 f/4 medium quality lens to be use as single lens in my trips, I should get a second camera body and use my "trinity" premium f/2,8 lenses. I think and hope that most of you agree with this approach?
Now, for the second camera body I could get an identical R5 (which is quite perfect to me) or wait for the next generation R5 Mark II near to be released camera. Big dilemma! The advantage of going for the R5 is to use for both bodies the identical menu, settings and so on, and at this stage buy it at a reasonable price. If I opt for the newest R5 Mark II, I will get some new features (why not? lol). BUT (!) price will be higher and on certain occasions where I will have to switch camera on the fly (ie because a chaotic event for example) I might get stuck (maybe) btw the 2 camera settings and so on...
What is your personal opinion? Do you think the Mark II will add for example in terms of image quality, dynamic range and AF precision better results than the current R5?

For the subjects you list as what type of photography you do, I doubt very much that there will be anything in an R5 II that will impact your photography in any major way. Dynamic Range and Noise have been essentially unchanged in every camera brand for the past 5 years or more, since Canon went to on sensor ADC. I would expect the R5 II will upgrade the AF in the same way that the R6 to R6 II was upgraded - which, despite the clamor - just adds tracking to all zones, which can be a plus or a minus. Pre-burst mode is useful for wildlife phpotographers - not sure it is a big deal for what you do. If the R5 is quite perfect for you, than I think you have answered your own question. This is just my opinion, of course. Making a multiple thousand dollar decision based on rumors or input from people who have no facts is a rather silly thing to do.

 

[puffo25]

Appreciated Czardoom for your feedback.
About my initial point which is: I have several lenses and when I make a photo shooting project on a flea market or in a rural area (taking photo of local people in the streets, reportage photos in exotic places like Sri Lanka, Madagascar, Indonesia, Thailand, Tunisia, Oman, etc., pictures of events during my travel excursions, local parades, documentary, historical ceremonies, etc.), the scenery can change quite often in front of me. So I have 2 options: to buy a multi purpose RF 24-105 f4 lens OR to use my exiting "prime" lenses set (15-35 f2,8, 24-70 f2,8 70-200 f2,8, 85mm f1,2) and buy a second camera body. Which solution you think is better? Personally I tend to go for a second camera body in order to keep the high quality level of my existing lenses and take adavantge also to the fact that they are brighter too (2,8 vs 4) which could help also in specific low light sceneries...

Thanks in advance if you can provide your new feedback.

 

[kaihp]

You might be putting the cart before the horse here.

Maybe it's the bloated firmware size that requires the larger number of processor cores, and not the other way around?

The number of processors cores and the size of the firmware may be totally unrelated.

I worked on a device where 95% of the cycles were spent in an extremely tight loop (less than 5 instructions, as I recall) as it was processing audio samples, and yet 80% of the firmware code was for the wireless subsystem. A network protocol is essentially a programmed state-machine, which means that each state is generally touched quite seldomly, but you need all that code to make it work correctly in all cases. We ended up adding a separate integer processing instruction set to match what a standard C-compiler needs and expects vs the fixed-point arithmetic done by the "main" signal processor.

As for multiple processor cores: if they are identical cores, each processing a sub-task of an overall task (think JPG encoding, object focus detection etc, each dedicated to a sub-part of the image frame), then you can have as many cores you'd like, but a very small firmware footprint.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Nikon has to be aggressive with pricing and features because they are desperate to claw back what they have haemorrhaged.

They also can't go too far.
Nikon would never survive a price war with Canon and Sony.

 

[Czardoom]

Appreciated Czardoom for your feedback.
About my initial point which is: I have several lenses and when I make a photo shooting project on a flea market or in a rural area (taking photo of local people in the streets, reportage photos in exotic places like Sri Lanka, Madagascar, Indonesia, Thailand, Tunisia, Oman, etc., pictures of events during my travel excursions, local parades, documentary, historical ceremonies, etc.), the scenery can change quite often in front of me. So I have 2 options: to buy a multi purpose RF 24-105 f4 lens OR to use my exiting "prime" lenses set (15-35 f2,8, 24-70 f2,8 70-200 f2,8, 85mm f1,2) and buy a second camera body. Which solution you think is better? Personally I tend to go for a second camera body in order to keep the high quality level of my existing lenses and take adavantge also to the fact that they are brighter too (2,8 vs 4) which could help also in specific low light sceneries...

Thanks in advance if you can provide your new feedback.

I'm afraid I can not answer your question without extreme bias. I don't use primes (other than one 300 f/4 m4/3rds telephoto for wildlife) and have no desire or need to ever use them. I find being able to zoom to the desired composition to be my main priority for any type of shooting other than BIF (and even with BIF I prefer a zoom to a wider field of view to get the subject in frame). It sounds like your opinion is get the 2d body as you prefer the quality of the primes as well as the f/2.8 aperture. If that is your preference, why not go with it?

 

[LookingThroughMyLens81]

Best Buy sells low-end and mid-range cameras in their stores, both body and camera + lens packaging, with high-end camera bodies and camera + lens packages only available online. Their in-store lens selection covers the low-end and mid-range choices, with high-end lenses only available online. High-end lenses and bodies can be shipped to stores for pickup, usually within a week or so. Walmart and Target only sell low-end cameras in their stores, specifically the body and lens kits and rely on third-party resellers, through their website, to cover everything else camera and lens related.

 

[Michael Clark]

So I'd expect the R1 to be under £6000.

If it has a global shutter, which was the qualification of the comment to which you replied, under £6000 is a pipe dream.

 

[Michael Clark]

I'm afraid I can not answer your question without extreme bias. I don't use primes (other than one 300 f/4 m4/3rds telephoto for wildlife) and have no desire or need to ever use them. I find being able to zoom to the desired composition to be my main priority for any type of shooting other than BIF (and even with BIF I prefer a zoom to a wider field of view to get the subject in frame). It sounds like your opinion is get the 2d body as you prefer the quality of the primes as well as the f/2.8 aperture. If that is your preference, why not go with it?

All of the f/2.8 lenses he's listed are zooms. Only the 85mm f/1.2 is a prime.

The difference is that to get the range of 24-105mm in a single zoom he has to settle for f/4 and lower image quality than what the 24-70/2.8 + the 70-200/2.8 can do.

 

[Michael Clark]

Good morning all. I need a reccomandation. I own a Canon R5 and several RF lenses (15-35 f2,8, 24-70 f2,8, 70-200 f2,8, 85 f1,2, 100-500 f7,1). As I do documentary, travel and street photography, I have come to the conclusion that rather than buy a RF 24-105 f/4 medium quality lens to be use as single lens in my trips, I should get a second camera body and use my "trinity" premium f/2,8 lenses. I think and hope that most of you agree with this approach?
Now, for the second camera body I could get an identical R5 (which is quite perfect to me) or wait for the next generation R5 Mark II near to be released camera. Big dilemma! The advantage of going for the R5 is to use for both bodies the identical menu, settings and so on, and at this stage buy it at a reasonable price. If I opt for the newest R5 Mark II, I will get some new features (why not? lol). BUT (!) price will be higher and on certain occasions where I will have to switch camera on the fly (ie because a chaotic event for example) I might get stuck (maybe) btw the 2 camera settings and so on...
What is your personal opinion? Do you think the Mark II will add for example in terms of image quality, dynamic range and AF precision better results than the current R5?

For me, it's always about the lenses first - then how many and which bodies follow what works best for each lens or lens combination.

So base your choice primarily on what you want your lens(es) to give you.

I'd also be VERY surprised if you can have an R5 Mark II in your hands by November, 2023. Even if you are the first to preorder on announcement day, whenever that will be. If there have been no reports of seeing suspected R5 Mark II prototypes being tested in the wild at this point, I doubt it will be released before the end of 2023. Maybe an official announcement this fall and shipping to begin in very early 2024 is about as optimistic as I would be.

I tend to shoot two camera setups most of the time, and have been doing so since around 2009 when I first had two DSLR bodies at the same time.

These days that's a 5D Mark IV for my "wide" lens and a 7D Mark II for the "long" lens. At other times it's a 5D Mark III for the "wide" lens and the 5D Mark IV for the "long" lens. It all depends upon the use case. The 5D Mark IV and 7D Mark II controls/menus are near identical, and the 5D Mark III isn't that different. The biggest difference is the 5D Mark III's lack of flicker reduction and a two layer light meter instead of an RGB+IR meter, features both of the other two cameras have.

In bright light it's almost always: 5D Mark IV + EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L, 7D Mark II + EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II.

For years I used the EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS on the FF "wide" body. 105mm on FF is just narrower than 70mm on APS-C, so I had 24-105mm on one body and FF equivalent 112-320mm on the APS-C body. But I found that unless I was standing on an unstable surface, such as a temporary outdoor stage vibrating with loud music, I didn't really miss IS (nor 70-105mm) at 24-70mm and there's a noticeable enough difference in IQ between the 24-70/2.8 and the 24-105/4 to give up IS and 70-105mm. (Note: the IQ difference is more noticeable when comparing the two lenses on the 30MP 5D Mark IV than when comparing them on the 22MP 5D Mark III.)

In theatrical lighting settings where there's no 120Hz flicker I may go with the above or swap the 7D Mark II for a 5D Mark III to use with the "wide" lens and put the "long" lens on the 5D Mark IV.

If I have good freedom of movement and close access then in very low light it's usually 5D Mark IV + EF 135mm f/2 and 5D Mark III + EF 35mm f/2 IS (or maybe the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L).