Canon EOS R5 Specifications

[Quarkcharmed]

You specifically asked me about my prediction regarding high ISO noise.

I was responding to this message https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/canon-eos-r5-specifications.38165/post-812879 and while you mentioned a high ISO value I didn't have an impression you were talking specifically about the high ISO range.

Are you kidding? Do I need to pull out the 7D Zion shot with a 2.5ev shadow push?

No thanks, I know you have aces up your sleeves But I've seen it already. I just have similar examples from say my old 70D and it produces much greater noise in the shadows. And 70D's DR is even slightly better than 7D.

Never the less it pretty conclusively shows that the 5D IV being roughly 1ev behind the gen 3 A7's and Nikon D8x0's is due to the DPAF arrangement. That's bad news if you want Canon to match Sony on a chart because Canon is not abandoning DPAF.

I can't tell I'm happily happy with 5DIV performance but I'm ok with it. Still I think there's a room for improvement even with DPAF. If Canon releases a 80Mp camera with the same DR as 5DIV, it'll be satisfactory to me. The 45Mp one - not sure, I'll wait for reviews.

 

[Grimbald]

45 MP = poor high ISO performance???

I thought the same, but then again: The 90d had a big pump in resolution (about 33% more pixels) compared to the 80d and yet outperformes it's low light capabilites. I therefore hope that a 45MP will give similar if not better results than the low light performance of the 5d Mark IV.

Maybe it's also Canon's first BSI sensor? We know they have been putting alot of research into that and patented stuff years ago

 

[-pekr-]

I thought the same, but then again: The 90d had a big pump in resolution (about 33% more pixels) compared to the 80d and yet outperformes it's low light capabilites. I therefore hope that a 45MP will give similar if not better results than the low light performance of the 5d Mark IV.

Maybe it's also Canon's first BSI sensor? We know they have been putting alot of research into that and patented stuff years ago

I don't want similar, nor slightly better. Why to buy new camera at all then? We are ok with 30mpx. I think no wedding photogs would ask for more, or less, just a modest bump would be OK. We are also not a sports shooters, so I really don't care about the ultra-high framerate. We have top EF lens for the job given and even if we would start with R, we would still use those, as 5DIV would become our backup. So it mostly narrows down to focus capabilites (which are quite good with the 5DIV) and sensor performance. I would prefer staying with 30mpx and e.g. 1 stop better DR, than having 45 and something like equal or 1/3 of the stop range of an improvement ....

 

[Quarkcharmed]

I thought the same, but then again: The 90d had a big pump in resolution (about 33% more pixels) compared to the 80d and yet outperformes it's low light capabilites.

I also thought so until recently, but apparently there were initial incorrect measurements of 90D, current state looks like this

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

The sensors are identical, however 90D is still better as it has more resolution. But it's not as good as you might have thought.

On the other hand, the way they measure the 'photographic DR' makes DR of cropped sensors about 1 stop worse than FF. You can check A7RIV FF and crop mode, same sensor, but in crop mode they measure 1 stop worse.

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

www.photonstophotos.net

So if you extrapolate 90D measurements to FF, you'll get roughly 5DIV performance but at 80Mp resolution.

So I'm still hoping the Canon's 80Mp RS will be as good as 5DIV, and 45Mp R5 may be even better in terms of the dynamic range. Also there's a chance they put even more advanced sensors in the R5 and RS.

 

[Memdroid]

Yeah, and they charged $15,000 for the privilege of owning the only 4K camera available at the time.

I agree. But I don't think it was meant for the average joe either, just like the 1Dx is not everybodies cup of tea. Mostly by budgetary reasons.

 

[bbb34]

I haven't seen 850D images, but I've drawn the slot for the EOS R. Am I an artist now? Is it visually pleasing and does it convey emotions?

View attachment 188460

Now we know why you have become a photographer!

 

[Cat_Interceptor]

A new 90D? Enjoy your EOS M6 Mk III

- A

M6 mk II already better than a 90D ......... and who would have thought Canon would have come out with a M series that we are legit going to want a sequel to?

I kinda would like to see a new version of the removable EVF at some point.

 

[reef58]

Another reason why i believe DSLR development is now dead is how much development money Canon has spent on the 10 new R lenses. Probably millions. They have already amortized all the development costs of the EF lenses over the millions of lenses sold.

But they have sold few R lenses.

Why would they develop a DSLR that they could never sell a R lens with? The 1dx3 is a small volume product so it is an exception, mainly due to the needs of the sports pro and lack of long R glass. But this is coming too.

When you look at R glass available, it is pro grade glass that covers the vast majority of range needed for non sports pro photographers (wedding, event, studio, landscape etc.)

So I can't imagine they would develop any more full frame cameras that can't use these lenses. It makes no economic sense.

DSLR's are still 50% or so of the market. Should they just abandon that? I have nothing to back it up, but I would bet most working pros are still using DSLR's. What I mean by that, more than 50%. Should they just throw in the towel of that also? They can handle both cameras with mirrors and cameras without.

 

[SecureGSM]

Those are great. Do you have a link? I’d love to see them.

thank you. I have got about 100 portraits out of nearly 800 taken during my Balinese project posted on my Facebook with public access. I will message you the address.

 

[vjlex]

I've been wondering if the high-megapixel R won't get the R3 designation. Remember when we were all waiting for years for the EOS 3D to come in between the 1D and 5D? But because of the confusion calling a camera '3D' would have caused, it likely became the 5DS?

 

[freejay]

Related to those, who always complain about the video specs and say they need no video features and don't want to pay for it:

I'm pretty sure that the jump in possible frames per second, we have seen in the latest models, as well as more sophisticated object tracking, is a result of making the readout speeds of the sensor faster. And THIS - I'm pretty sure - was done mainly to allow faster frame rates and less rolling shutter in video in the first place. So: Development for video specs have a direct impact for the photographic oriented functions. This is all a win win. If you don't need it, ignore it.

I for myself have never ever used white balance bracketing. I would never come up with the idea of complaining that they built in this functionality...

 

[tron]

Related to those, who always complain about the video specs and say they need no video features and don't want to pay for it:

I'm pretty sure that the jump in possible frames per second, we have seen in the latest models, as well as more sophisticated object tracking, is a result of making the readout speeds of the sensor faster. And THIS - I'm pretty sure - was done mainly to allow faster frame rates and less rolling shutter in video in the first place. So: Development for video specs have a direct impact for the photographic oriented functions. This is all a win win. If you don't need it, ignore it.

I for myself have never ever used white balance bracketing. I would never come up with the idea of complaining that they built in this functionality...

10fps speed existed many many years ago and certainly before video...

 

[brad-man]

M6 mk II already better than a 90D ......... and who would have thought Canon would have come out with a M series that we are legit going to want a sequel to?

I kinda would like to see a new version of the removable EVF at some point.

Me too. I'd like one that doesn't use the hot shoe...

 

[Gazwas]

Now I'm over the disappointment of it not being an RS camera, I'm itching to see some pictures of the camera.

What do people think, just a carbon copy of the EOS R (nothing wrong with that) with some switched around buttons and dials or do you think we'll get a different designed of camera?

I'd love to see it like a mini 1D in design so we get an integrated vertical grip. Mirrorless cameras in general remind me on the old Olympus OM cameras where as I'd like them to be more a cross between EOS R and T90.

 

[Gazwas]

How about this?

 

[JohnC]

M6 mk II already better than a 90D ......... and who would have thought Canon would have come out with a M series that we are legit going to want a sequel to?

I kinda would like to see a new version of the removable EVF at some point.

I have to admit, I bought the M6 Mark II as a bit of an afterthough... something that I could take with me just in case, etc. I have come to love shooting with the camera using the EVF with both native mount and adapted lenses. The 180L macro almost has TOO much reach to use handheld however. lol. so far I have done very little tripod work with it, but I find the shutter speeds, etc. needed to get sharp images very manageable despite all of the pixel density/can't hand hold things I've heard.

 

[JohnC]

I've been wondering if the high-megapixel R won't get the R3 designation. Remember when we were all waiting for years for the EOS 3D to come in between the 1D and 5D? But because of the confusion calling a camera '3D' would have caused, it likely became the 5DS?

That would be interesting and I kind of hope it happens. I have the EOS 3, wouldn't mind having its eventual descendant.

 

[JohnC]

How about this?

that looks pretty good

 

[JohnC]

On the other hand, the way they measure the 'photographic DR' makes DR of cropped sensors about 1 stop worse than FF. You can check A7RIV FF and crop mode, same sensor, but in crop mode they measure 1 stop worse.

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

www.photonstophotos.net

I have looked at all of that before, and I suppose they to have a way of normalizing the data from various sensors. In my opinion however, this doesn't actually tell you the dynamic range potential of the sensor itself.

So if you extrapolate 90D measurements to FF, you'll get roughly 5DIV performance but at 80Mp resolution.

So I'm still hoping the Canon's 80Mp RS will be as good as 5DIV, and 45Mp R5 may be even better in terms of the dynamic range. Also there's a chance they put even more advanced sensors in the R5 and RS.

Exactly, me too. I have the M6 Mark II... I would love to see a full frame version of that sensor or close to it. I suppose I would be willing to give up a little resolution for a little larger pixel size. The sensor performs really well as is.

 

[dtaylor]

I was responding to this message https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/canon-eos-r5-specifications.38165/post-812879 and while you mentioned a high ISO value I didn't have an impression you were talking specifically about the high ISO range.

That post is entirely about high ISO and does not address DR at all.

No thanks, I know you have aces up your sleeves But I've seen it already.

Yet you still insist that 1.5ev is a difficult shadow push and that ~1ev difference between the 5D4 and best Sony/Nikon bodies is large. It's not large, it's a processing adjustment.

Still I think there's a room for improvement even with DPAF.

Nikon set the bar with the D800 release, and that bar has barely moved in 8 years. There's something else going on at the circuit level, for the current state of the art, which has capped DR and done so in a counter intuitive manner. The highest DR sensors, when measured as sensors (i.e. normalized view size, DxO methodology), are the sensors with the smaller pixels. And everything has been sitting at sub-15ev for a while. I don't know enough about sensor engineering to speculate as to why. I just know the data has been remarkably consistent for 8 years.

So unless Canon is going to introduce something truly new in their sensor circuitry, the R5 sensor is going to deliver ~13.6ev. And if you process the DPAF data properly you find the circuitry is actually capable of ~14.6. (Again, DxO methodology.)

If you prefer Photons to Photos formula then there's not even 1ev of difference between the 5D4, D850, and A7r4 at ISO 100 (or even ISO 50 on the D850). A difference that literally disappears by ISO 200. If that bothers you then you need Nikon or Sony. But regardless of charts and methodology, I would be very hard pressed indeed to find or produce a scene where that difference would be apparent to viewers shown 20x30 prints with no labels.

If Canon releases a 80Mp camera with the same DR as 5DIV, it'll be satisfactory to me. The 45Mp one - not sure, I'll wait for reviews.

In theory larger pixels should result in greater DR due to full well capacity. In practice that has not happened in 8 years.