Canon has registered a new ILC camera with regulators

jam05

R5, C70
Mar 12, 2019
924
588
Question: What is the typical time between when a camera is registered and when it is shipped? I am guessing 2-3 months, but I am only guessing. Looks like registration is about a month before announcement (at least it was for the Sony A9 III).
However CP+ is February 22 - 25. Canon will have those operational units registered so as to enable and transmit wifi/Bluetooth.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

jam05

R5, C70
Mar 12, 2019
924
588
Question: What is the typical time between when a camera is registered and when it is shipped? I am guessing 2-3 months, but I am only guessing. Looks like registration is about a month before announcement (at least it was for the Sony A9 III).
This is an Olympic year. Timing most likely well ahead of the normal time frame. CP+ is Feb 22 - 25. I expect Canon to make its announcement then
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Jan 11, 2016
211
255
Anyone know the Wi-Fi spec of the more recent Canon bodies?

Is the spec even necessarily Wi-Fi? For example, could the one with a speed rating consistent with Wi-Fi 5 actually be a wireless flash like an EL-10 (430-series equivalent)?
Having support for 256-QAM usually indicates very high speed wireless communication and I think the only consumer usage of it are in Wi-Fi and LTE.

The radio controlled Speedlites starting from the 600EX-RT use O-QPSK + DS-SS only on 2.4 GHz since it doesn't need communication speeds in the hundreds of megabits per second.

Since the ID0179 product uses 256-QAM and supports both 2.4 and 5 GHz, I think we can safely assume whatever this product is supports Wi-Fi, since LTE doesn't operate on the 2.4 or 5 GHz bands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0

Doug7131

EOS R6 Mark II
Jul 21, 2019
60
195
Having support for 256-QAM usually indicates very high speed wireless communication and I think the only consumer usage of it are in Wi-Fi and LTE.

The radio controlled Speedlites starting from the 600EX-RT use O-QPSK + DS-SS only on 2.4 GHz since it doesn't need communication speeds in the hundreds of megabits per second.

Since the ID0179 product uses 256-QAM and supports both 2.4 and 5 GHz, I think we can safely assume whatever this product is supports Wi-Fi, since LTE doesn't operate on the 2.4 or 5 GHz bands.
The use of 20+80MHz channel widths also points towards WiFi. No wireless flash control would require such high bandwidth. The use of any QAM modulation would be unnecessary for wireless flash contol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

P-visie

EOS 5 - R5
CR Pro
Sep 14, 2020
132
237
Netherlands
www.p-visie.nl
From Asobinet (see here): ID0179 might be a Cinema camera.
”ID0179 is a character string that you don't see very often. That's not to say it can't be said, and considering that "EOS R5 C" has ID0159, it seems likely that it is a Cinema Line camera. I think there were some products that were rumored, but the details are unknown.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

john1970

EOS R3
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
994
1,234
Northeastern US
From Asobinet (see here): ID0179 might be a Cinema camera.
”ID0179 is a character string that you don't see very often. That's not to say it can't be said, and considering that "EOS R5 C" has ID0159, it seems likely that it is a Cinema Line camera. I think there were some products that were rumored, but the details are unknown.”
A Cinema camera makes quite a bit of sense given the fact that Canon is currently releasing many new RF mount cinema lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
R1 and R1C - R1 super-focused on stills shooters. R1C super-focused on video shooters. R1C gets the internal ND filter and other video-centric features. At least 8k. 12k? And the R1 is the king of sports and fast action. The only question . . . will the MP of the R1 be too close to R3 territory? Or will it give decent (if less than 45MP) resolution?
 
Upvote 0
Jan 11, 2016
211
255
R1 and R1C - R1 super-focused on stills shooters. R1C super-focused on video shooters. R1C gets the internal ND filter and other video-centric features. At least 8k. 12k? And the R1 is the king of sports and fast action. The only question . . . will the MP of the R1 be too close to R3 territory? Or will it give decent (if less than 45MP) resolution?
If it were an R1C, I think it would have exactly the same Wi-Fi module as the R1 and will support the same standard. Why put worse Wi-Fi into the video focused version?

I suspect it will be a C70 successor or something like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

john1970

EOS R3
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
994
1,234
Northeastern US
If it were an R1C, I think it would have exactly the same Wi-Fi module as the R1 and will support the same standard. Why put worse Wi-Fi into the video focused version?

I suspect it will be a C70 successor or something like that.
Along the same line of thought, why would a C70 Mk2 have a worse Wi-Fi module than R1? I am not being critical. Another view to consider, is that maybe Canon is putting the best WiFi module in the R1 to enable fast photo downloads while the Cinema version does not require such capability.

A R1 / R1C parallel launch would be quite amazing and might explain the different specs that are being rumored. The next few weeks are going to be fun :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jan 11, 2016
211
255
Along the same line of thought, why would a C70 Mk2 have a worse Wi-Fi module than R1? I am not being critical. Another view to consider, is that maybe Canon is putting the best WiFi module in the R1 to enable fast photo downloads while the Cinema version does not require such capability.

A R1 / R1C parallel launch would be quite amazing and might explain the different specs that are being rumored. The next few weeks are going to be fun :)
It would be more much likely for two different electronics platforms on very different cameras to have different wireless capabilities than an R1 and an R1C (which if it exists, I would assume they share the same platform like the R5 and R5C, or the 1DX and 1DC).

I think it would cost more for Canon to validate two different WiFi modules for an otherwise similar or same set of electronics than to just stick the same one into both. They are going to charge $6500+ for the camera, and I don't think it is like Canon to cut costs here (especially when no money might be saved given the additional FCC/CE/etc... validation this would cost).

In any case, if they were different, I would assume the cinema camera to have the better capability, because (1) video files are bigger especially if they want to stream it off the camera, (2) the cinema camera would cost more so there are better margins to absorb the cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

john1970

EOS R3
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
994
1,234
Northeastern US
It would be more much likely for two different electronics platforms on very different cameras to have different wireless capabilities than an R1 and an R1C (which if it exists, I would assume they share the same platform like the R5 and R5C, or the 1DX and 1DC).

I think it would cost more for Canon to validate two different WiFi modules for an otherwise similar or same set of electronics than to just stick the same one into both. They are going to charge $6500+ for the camera, and I don't think it is like Canon to cut costs here (especially when no money might be saved given the additional FCC/CE/etc... validation this would cost).

In any case, if they were different, I would assume the cinema camera to have the better capability, because (1) video files are bigger especially if they want to stream it off the camera, (2) the cinema camera would cost more so there are better margins to absorb the cost.
I agree that the more likely scenario is that we see a C50 or C90 camera, but the possibility of a R1/ R1C combo is fun to conjecture about.
 
Upvote 0
Along the same line of thought, why would a C70 Mk2 have a worse Wi-Fi module than R1?
Here's my thinking: As Wi-Fi 5 has lower bandwidth and higher latency than Wi-Fi 6, the use case of the ID0179 camera is likely to require less bandwidth and be less sensitive to latency than the DSxxxxx camera.
It wouldn't make sense to put two different modules into two almost identical products, like the proposed R1 and R1C.
I think it's much more likely that the two cameras are highly different.

So if the ID0179 camera is a video camera (PTZ or Cinema line), it is likely to be for remote control, rather than live streaming of high-quality high-resolution video.
Sure, 4K H.265 video stream could be supported by Wi-Fi 5, but that's a compressed stream.

The DS camera could support Wi-Fi 6 to have fast wireless transfer of (still) images, something that could be compatible with the idea of a Pro level camera (think R1).

I've certainly never used the wireless data transfer of my cameras, so I don't know what would be important for the type of photographers that need/use this.

As others have said, it's likely that everything will be revealed at CP+.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,228
13,089
Canon is making new cameras but the reality is their old cameras are nowhere near their maximum performance potential.
Oh, is that why you and other cave-dwelling forum trolls like you never seem to post any pictures? News flash: the excellent images posted by value-adding members here shot with current (and older) Canon cameras conclusively demonstrate that if you can’t use them to make great images, the fault is not with the gear. That’s the reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Upvote 0

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
3,394
4,318
Oh, is that why you and other cave-dwelling forum trolls like you never seem to post any pictures? News flash: the excellent images posted by value-adding members here shot with current (and older) Canon cameras conclusively demonstrate that if you can’t use them to make great images, the fault is not with the gear. That’s the reality.
It is indeed a fact that those who spend their time on this forum criticising Canon's products and market decisions never seem to post any pictures.
Strange, isn't it? :unsure:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0