Canon EOS R8 specifications

[RMac]

So take an R6ii, drop the IBIS, a card slot, and some controls and ergo, and charge about a thousand less for it... Got it.

 

[JustUs7]

So take an R6ii, drop the IBIS, a card slot, and some controls and ergo, and charge about a thousand less for it... Got it.

Sounds pretty cool, right!?!

 

[Blue Zurich]

There's never a "last" camera.
The last camera is the camera before the next one...

If my R6 keeps chugging along it will be my last. It does everything I want and I cannot see putting as many clicks into it as I did my 5D3 before it (far more than the expected shutter life) since I shoot far less these days than I did with that camera. So last it is.

 

[Dragon]

If my R6 keeps chugging along it will be my last. It does everything I want and I cannot see putting as many clicks into it as I did my 5D3 before it (far more than the expected shutter life) since I shoot far less these days than I did with that camera. So last it is.

To say any item is your "last" is either 1) a statement that you are looking forward to pushing up dasies or 2) a statement that you don't think there is anything left in life that will pique your interest. Pretty much the same thing, actually. Those who look forward to doing something tomorrow that they have never done before are the ones who live the longest. Michaelangelo lived to be 88 years old (when the average life span was about 35) and he spent half his life drenched in lead paint but he always had a dream of what he could do tomorrow.

 

[ashmadux]

No ibis? LOLOL that cant be right.. it just cant be.

So Canon (marketing!) has decided to make Ibis a premium feature ..... because its a 'cheap full frame?

That would amount to clown show behavior from Canon.+ That means it's pretty much guaranteed the r50 won't have ibis either.

Along with any chance that I'll be buying it.

See you guys next spring when they announce a decent prime for RFS. Mount is still brand new and it is a absolute joke, with an utterly embarrassing lens selection. Pathetic.

 

[davidespinosa]

So take an R6ii, drop the IBIS, a card slot, and some controls and ergo, and charge about a thousand less for it... Got it.

And drop the EVF too !

 

[mb66energy]

I see myself buying this camera for EF 16-35 4.0 IS. I see myself buying this camera for EF 100 Macro (old USM), EF 100 2.0 for compactness, EF 40 2.8 for high contrast in contralight. Is it GAS? I don't know, but I will wait ...

 

[Kit.]

If a camera shoots 6 frames in 100fps at say 1/600s each, then merging them will give the same s/n as 1 frame at 1/100s at 1/6 the iso since the same number of photons hit the sensor in both cases. Repeating an exposure 6x increases s/n over a single one by sqrt6 = 2.44x. You won't eliminate noise let alone increase s/n over a single longer shot by that procedure.

However, it may give enough data to eliminate  movement even with relatively dumb algorithms.

 

[Deepboy]

Man! I can live without IBIS but please give us a real battery not that shitty LP-e17. What's the point of a lighter body if we have to carry additional batteries and a charger?
I just love how I can take my 70d out for a whole week and leave the charger at home. I know a fully charged battery will be enough. Could I do the same with the RP? with the R8?

If you want a lighter body then you accept that batteries will be smaller ans so less durable; and if you want a high capacity battery, you've to accept a heavier and bigger body, that has enough space to accommodate a bigger battery. It's physics.

My R6 last 8 to 10 times more then my R10; but the R6 has a battery grip, carries two batteries and it's basically twice the weight and twice the size; in Italy we do say "you can't have the barrel full (of wine), and the wife drunk, at the same time", meaning you can't have it all at the same time, you've to renounce something.

Also, confronting a DSLR (70D) with a ML is pointless, the power drain is absolutely different, with 6D i could shoot 1 month with two batteries in the battery grip, now with R6 I shoot one week with the same amount of battery, if I'm lucky.

 

[blackcoffee17]

if you want a high capacity battery, you've to accept a heavier and bigger body, that has enough space to accommodate a bigger battery. It's physics.

Somehow Sony managed to overcome physics when designing the A7C with twice the capacity of the RP's...

 

[Blue Zurich]

To say any item is your "last" is either 1) a statement that you are looking forward to pushing up dasies or 2) a statement that you don't think there is anything left in life that will pique your interest. Pretty much the same thing, actually. Those who look forward to doing something tomorrow that they have never done before are the ones who live the longest. Michaelangelo lived to be 88 years old (when the average live span was about 35) and he spent half his life drenched in lead paint but he always had a dream of what he could do tomorrow.

Point missed. It was accolades to the R6 and a nod to my usage these days. I am and always will be a creative, it's not just imaging, there is so much more for me and in life in general. Then there's the auto immune disorder which affects my retinas so music is a priority over photography these days. The looking forward to dying part you wrote is completely moronic....Just don't.

 

[photophil]

Point missed. It was accolades to the R6 and a nod to my usage these days. I am and always will be a creative, it's not just imaging, there is so much more for me and in life in general. Then there's the auto immune disorder which affects my retinas so music is a priority over photography these days. The looking forward to dying part you wrote is completely moronic....Just don't.

I hope that you get to enjoy your hobbies for a long time <3

 

[LSXPhotog]

No ibis? LOLOL that cant be right.. it just cant be.

So Canon (marketing!) has decided to make Ibis a premium feature ..... because its a 'cheap full frame?

That would amount to clown show behavior from Canon.+ That means it's pretty much guaranteed the r50 won't have ibis either.

Along with any chance that I'll be buying it.

See you guys next spring when they announce a decent prime for RFS. Mount is still brand new and it is a absolute joke, with an utterly embarrassing lens selection. Pathetic.

IBIS is a premium feature. What evidence that currently exists with any current camera model from any company would indicate that it’s not a premium feature that adds additional cost? The cheapest current camera model that features IBIS with an APS-C sensor is the Fujifilm X-S10 is $1000 body only. Full-frame? The $1800 Sony A7C. But you want a $1500 full-frame camera to have it and a sub $800 APS-C to have it…got it. They’re a clown show. haha

 

[entoman]

What I commented on was:

a) half a dozen shots can reduce noise by no more than 60%, and not eliminate noise and be noise free.
b) half a dozen rapid shots will in any case have no less noise than one shot encompassing the same time period.

That example by entoman is not an example of the "the merging ten exposures of 1 s into a single exposure of 1 s", but refers to a series of 6 very rapid short time shots at 100 fps, when one could take one slower shot at lower fps.

The point of my original post was straightforward - I was stating that I believe it will become possible within a few years (based on what has been published by dpr, fstoppers etc) for small format cameras such as M43 to use similar technology to that found in smartphones, to merge a burst of images in order to reduce noise.

What I stated, precisely was" if a camera could shoot half a dozen frames at 100fps there would be virtually no subject or camera movement between shots, and this is where in-camera merging will become a major feature for eliminating noise, merging focus-brackets, and hand-held pixel-shift high resolution".

I made no mention in that post of the individual or total exposure times, but you singled out one possible method of merging, that *won't* reduce noise, but ignored another possible method that *will* reduce noise.

You appear to believe (incorrectly) that I was talking *specifically* about the first method described by neuro i.e. "Merging ten exposures of 1/10 s into a single exposure of 1 s will not yield lower noise than a single 1 s exposure". That method clearly won't reduce noise!

The maths in my quickly written follow-up post was dodgy, but my original point remains. It *is* possible to reduce noise by merging a burst of images.

@neuroanatomist pointed out the method that would need to be used is that in his second example, i.e. "Merging ten exposures of 1 s into a single exposure of 1 s will yield less noise than a single exposure of 1 s. Mathematically, that’s averaging image data and random image noise will be reduced."

 

[Sporgon]

The point of my original post was straightforward - I was stating that I believe it will become possible within a few years (based on what has been published by dpr, fstoppers etc) for small format cameras such as M43 to use similar technology to that found in smartphones, to merge a burst of images in order to reduce noise.

What I stated, precisely was" if a camera could shoot half a dozen frames at 100fps there would be virtually no subject or camera movement between shots, and this is where in-camera merging will become a major feature for eliminating noise, merging focus-brackets, and hand-held pixel-shift high resolution".

I made no mention in that post of the individual or total exposure times, but you singled out one possible method of merging, that *won't* reduce noise, but ignored another possible method that *will* reduce noise.

You appear to believe (incorrectly) that I was talking *specifically* about the first method described by neuro i.e. "Merging ten exposures of 1/10 s into a single exposure of 1 s will not yield lower noise than a single 1 s exposure". That method clearly won't reduce noise!

The maths in my quickly written follow-up post was dodgy, but my original point remains. It *is* possible to reduce noise by merging a burst of images.

@neuroanatomist pointed out the method that would need to be used is that in his second example, i.e. "Merging ten exposures of 1 s into a single exposure of 1 s will yield less noise than a single exposure of 1 s. Mathematically, that’s averaging image data and random image noise will be reduced."

I knew what you meant
As shot noise is random different frames have a different pattern of noise, so blend them and the noise pattern is merged out.
It’s a technique I sometimes use with my G1XIII, and the camera shooting at 9 fps makes for easily alignment of the frames in post.

 

[AlanF]

The point of my original post was straightforward - I was stating that I believe it will become possible within a few years (based on what has been published by dpr, fstoppers etc) for small format cameras such as M43 to use similar technology to that found in smartphones, to merge a burst of images in order to reduce noise.

What I stated, precisely was" if a camera could shoot half a dozen frames at 100fps there would be virtually no subject or camera movement between shots, and this is where in-camera merging will become a major feature for eliminating noise, merging focus-brackets, and hand-held pixel-shift high resolution".

I made no mention in that post of the individual or total exposure times, but you singled out one possible method of merging, that *won't* reduce noise, but ignored another possible method that *will* reduce noise.

You appear to believe (incorrectly) that I was talking *specifically* about the first method described by neuro i.e. "Merging ten exposures of 1/10 s into a single exposure of 1 s will not yield lower noise than a single 1 s exposure". That method clearly won't reduce noise!

The maths in my quickly written follow-up post was dodgy, but my original point remains. It *is* possible to reduce noise by merging a burst of images.

@neuroanatomist pointed out the method that would need to be used is that in his second example, i.e. "Merging ten exposures of 1 s into a single exposure of 1 s will yield less noise than a single exposure of 1 s. Mathematically, that’s averaging image data and random image noise will be reduced."

Of course it is possible to reduce noise by merging a burst of images relative to a single image in that burst. But, the corollary of high fps is that each frame is of short duration and so each individual frame has poorer s/n than one in a slower burst of shots of longer duration. It's a different situation from the one used by dpr or the second example from neuro when it comes to action or much of nature photography because you have a limited time slot for stopping movement and you have to get in your shots in that time slot. So, let's put some numbers into your criterion is " if a camera could shoot half a dozen frames at 100fps there would be virtually no subject or camera movement between shots,." If I take a photo of a fast bird flying or a dragonfly with its wings flapping, I use 1/3200s as slower exposure times can lead to motion blur. In order to take 6 shots in 1/3200s, each one would have to be of duration 1/19200s or less. That would need at least 19,200 fps. Even if I slowed down and said that 1/1000s would be the time span for freezing motion, I would need a frame rate of 6000 fps. So, 100 fps wouldn't suffice for your freezing of action criterion for popular moving subjects but would for @Skyscraperfan's subjects.

 

[Sporgon]

Of course it is possible to reduce noise by merging a burst of images relative to a single image in that burst. But, the corollary of high fps is that each frame is of short duration and so each individual frame has poorer s/n than one in a slower burst of shots of longer duration. It's a different situation from the one used by dpr or the second example from neuro when it comes to action or much of nature photography because you have a limited time slot for stopping movement and you have to get in your shots in that time

I’m not sure I’m following this correctly. It sounds as if you’re saying that for a given EV using a faster shutter speed will increase shot noise ?

 

[AJ]

The point of my original post was straightforward - I was stating that I believe it will become possible within a few years (based on what has been published by dpr, fstoppers etc) for small format cameras such as M43 to use similar technology to that found in smartphones, to merge a burst of images in order to reduce noise.

What I stated, precisely was" if a camera could shoot half a dozen frames at 100fps there would be virtually no subject or camera movement between shots, and this is where in-camera merging will become a major feature for eliminating noise, merging focus-brackets, and hand-held pixel-shift high resolution".

I agree. Not only that, but with multiple readouts one should be able to improve dynamic range as well.

 

[AlanF]

I’m not sure I’m following this correctly. In this example are you saying that you’re increasing shutter speed but nothing else - aperture and ISO ? Surely combinations of different shutter speeds and apertures both giving ‘correct’ exposure at the same ISO would result in the same amount of shot noise.
It sounds as if you’re saying that noise increases with very fast shutter speeds irrespective of the EV value used.

Photon shot noise basically just depends on the number of photons hitting the sensor. Iso doesn't affect the shot noise, it roughly corresponds to signal amplification, but low number of photons means a higher iso setting so it looks like iso does affect the noise. What I am saying is you keep the aperture constant and vary the iso and shutter speed to maintain the same exposure. So, for example, I would compare 1 shot at 1/1000s and iso 100 with 6 shots at 1/6000s and iso 600. The shot noise is the same for both provided the circuitry doesn't introduce noise.

Of course, 6 shots of 1/1000s averaged give sqrt6*s/n of 1 shot 1/1000 at same iso, which is what you are doing.

 

[Sporgon]

Photon shot noise basically just depends on the number of photons hitting the sensor. Iso doesn't affect the shot noise, it roughly corresponds to signal amplification, but low number of photons means a higher iso setting so it looks like iso does affect the noise. What I am saying is you keep the aperture constant and vary the iso and shutter speed to maintain the same exposure. So, for example, I would compare 1 shot at 1/1000s and iso 100 with 6 shots at 1/6000s and iso 600. The shot noise is the same for both provided the circuitry doesn't introduce noise.

Yes I can definitely agree with that