Canon Interview: EOS R1 is the true flagship
- Thread starter Richard CN
- Start date
Newbie... Some of us were on the Internet before you could use @ in an email address and had to type in the path between the various computers the message went through with an exclamation point between each of them...
Upvote
0
At least they learn there is a manual.
I've seen people across brands who don't bother with the manual and think that the more expensive the camera, the easier it will be to use. The concept that a professional tool is generally harder to use because it's more flexible and there might be literally a hundred different ways to configure something, all of which have advantages and disadvantages, doesn't even occur to them. That their ten thousand dollars of new camera and lens is harder to use than their phone is a shock to them.
Upvote
0
Canon needs to develop products to match or exceed their competitor's products, not their own product line. The comments of making an R6 III to be better than an R5 II, then a R5 III better than an R6 III is wasted effort. Also DpReview just reported in their test of the R5 1 and R5 II that dynamic range is compromised and worse in the R5 II. They gave up some image quality for a faster readout. For me that's going in the wrong direction. Sony, Nikon, and others are smiling.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Why? Considering that on the order of 70-80% of all cameras in use today are made by Canon, the vast majority of likely Canon buyers are already Canon owners.
You mean the test where the exposure of the two images is noticeably different? Try downloading the RAWs and see for yourself. Or you can accept DPRs conclusion despite their history of bias.
Smiles don’t matter. Selling cameras does. Not to you or me as individuals, no one cares. In aggregate.
If the criticisms of DPR and others about every Canon camera released meant anything at all, it would have affected Canon’s camera sales relative to their competitors. The data show that Canon continues to dominate the market with no loss of market share.
Upvote
0
You mean you take information supplied by DPReview this is accurate? Refer to this post by @neuroanatomist :
I'll wait until proper scientific (and potentially unbiased) analysis is completed (maybe by photonstophotos) before I make any sort of assessment. But is +6 EV really how anyone shoots? Maybe as a recovery from a mix -up, but its not how I shoot.
Edit: @neuroanatomist beat me to the response.
Upvote
0
holy Sh*t you're old lol. meant only in jest!Newbie... Some of us were on the Internet before you could use @ in an email address and had to type in the path between the various computers the message went through with an exclamation point between each of them...
Upvote
0
My long winded 2 cents below:
I think a lot of people are hung up on the word flagship and its skewed meaning for Canon. The R1 is a master of a field of content that has a global revenue of about a half a trillion dollars per year - sports. Now, the majority of professional sports photographers are making bottom to middle tier, middle class wages at most (between $30,000 to $100,000 per year - average top earners make less than $50k a year), so a lot of these people aren’t practically buying their own gear on those salaries and gear is provided by whatever company they work for. These people and mostly the companies they work for care about how fast and efficiently they can churn out quality content that’s mostly consumed and discarded in a short period of time. A lot of these photographers just care about a device that does what they need it to do and not much else, and I doubt you’d find many lounging around forums like this nitpicking about specs they’ll never utilize. All of this makes sense to Canon, the photographers, and the companies they work for, so to Canon and their image, it’s worthy of the title flagship. Their flagship Camera geared toward one of the worlds highest grossing and content consuming industries.
Flagship meaning: The best or most important product, idea, building, etc. that an organization owns or produces.
This definition doesn’t describe what a fragmented segmentation of people want; a jack of all trades master of all product for less than what it would cost to produce. If Canon produced such a camera that was capable of that spec wise, it would be priced astronomically high and they most likely wouldn’t see a positive return on their investment.
When I was a professional wedding photographer, I never invested in any of the 1 series cameras because they either didn’t do what I needed, or they were loaded with extra features I found useless. Cost was never an issue, as it was always simply a matter of finding a piece of gear that suited my exact needs and buying it. Easiest thing to do in the world, as opposed to wishing for a different piece of equipment to be something it’s not.
So, tl;dr Canon knows exactly what they’re doing with the R1 and R5II, and they’re both designed ideally for different segments of the market. They’ll sell well for those that’ll utilize it, and it majorly bolsters their brand image further. This is flagship stuff for them.
Hey, if I’m wrong and the R1 and R5II tank, I guess Canons next earnings report will put them in the doomed bracket.
I think a lot of people are hung up on the word flagship and its skewed meaning for Canon. The R1 is a master of a field of content that has a global revenue of about a half a trillion dollars per year - sports. Now, the majority of professional sports photographers are making bottom to middle tier, middle class wages at most (between $30,000 to $100,000 per year - average top earners make less than $50k a year), so a lot of these people aren’t practically buying their own gear on those salaries and gear is provided by whatever company they work for. These people and mostly the companies they work for care about how fast and efficiently they can churn out quality content that’s mostly consumed and discarded in a short period of time. A lot of these photographers just care about a device that does what they need it to do and not much else, and I doubt you’d find many lounging around forums like this nitpicking about specs they’ll never utilize. All of this makes sense to Canon, the photographers, and the companies they work for, so to Canon and their image, it’s worthy of the title flagship. Their flagship Camera geared toward one of the worlds highest grossing and content consuming industries.
Flagship meaning: The best or most important product, idea, building, etc. that an organization owns or produces.
This definition doesn’t describe what a fragmented segmentation of people want; a jack of all trades master of all product for less than what it would cost to produce. If Canon produced such a camera that was capable of that spec wise, it would be priced astronomically high and they most likely wouldn’t see a positive return on their investment.
When I was a professional wedding photographer, I never invested in any of the 1 series cameras because they either didn’t do what I needed, or they were loaded with extra features I found useless. Cost was never an issue, as it was always simply a matter of finding a piece of gear that suited my exact needs and buying it. Easiest thing to do in the world, as opposed to wishing for a different piece of equipment to be something it’s not.
So, tl;dr Canon knows exactly what they’re doing with the R1 and R5II, and they’re both designed ideally for different segments of the market. They’ll sell well for those that’ll utilize it, and it majorly bolsters their brand image further. This is flagship stuff for them.
Hey, if I’m wrong and the R1 and R5II tank, I guess Canons next earnings report will put them in the doomed bracket.
Upvote
0
Photography is an element of the arts. Canon can repeat that "The R1 is our flagship" statement over and over if they please, but the consumer just aint buyin their argument in 2024. The R1 is a one trick pony. A tool for the contract sports photographer. That's about all I can claim for it. It may be their flagship sports camera. But overall flagship it is not. It is not a desireable camera for the average photographer. There are demanding projects that often require the "highest resolution available". The R1 doesn't cut the mustard. The R1 is like a stretch limousine waiting for ones rental for their occasional moments on the block.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
LOL. Is it demosaiced? Is it downsampled? Then it’s not RAW. I can export a JPG file as a DNG, but that doesn’t reconstitute the raw image data.
Upvote
0
Same can be said on a9iii.
And R1's last trick is the in-camera upscaling. Whether you like it or not, it is there and enables R1 to produce decent high MP images like a1 Z9.
When you mentioned "consumer", this is where the problem lies. All criticisms on R1 is from consumers/enthusiasts, they are looking at the wrong product for their use. It's like casual shooters bashing the Sony FX6 and praise Nikon Z8/Canon R5C instead, ridiculously out of context.
Upvote
0
Simple...
Shoot 8K60 raw with appropriate shutter speed for your subject movement
Extract frame grab
=> desired image *
Simple
* bit depth may vary
Upvote
0
On green screen or amber monitor?Newbie... Some of us were on the Internet before you could use @ in an email address and had to type in the path between the various computers the message went through with an exclamation point between each of them...
My first green screen was btw an Apple IIe ca. 1984 in the biochemistry lab - no internet and first Internet at university datacenter in ca. 1993 (IBM-AIX workstation) ...
Upvote
0
DNG is a container that can hold both RAW and non-RAW data, so it being a DNG isn’t saying much.
To get from 60 to 36 or 18, you have to debayer the data, which removes all the nice things RAW gives you, like non-destructive white balance changes.
The result might be good enough for your purposes, but it is not RAW.
Upvote
0
I feel like the people raging about the R1s specs and this stupid need of calling things flagships comes from the same people, who watch these strange videos on YouTube that try to theorise about Darth Vader beating superman in a fight to the death
Upvote
0
And you should have read my apologies a post later because of a misunderstanding... so what?!
Upvote
0
The R1 is not targeted at the “average photographer” (whoever/ whatever that may be). And how many “average photographers” buy 6000 $/€ camera’s?
If a project needs more resolution, then you should get another camera. Nothing new here, this has been Canon’s strategy since the 1Ds series was discontinued in 2012. For speed: 1Dx series, R3 and now the R1, for resolution: 5D series, R5.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
There are other choices for you from Zony and Nikon if you desire. Not sure why your complaining about a camera designed for sports (fast action) which I would include nature photography like fast birds in flight. And the Canon R3 truly is spectacular and the R1 is spectacular as well. I am sure after buy pro bodies for over ten years has even better auto focus. To me auto focus is king, as I shoot small little birds like swallows in flight.
If your into other photography that does not require fast auto focus then why complain that the camera did not meet "your" requirements?
Pass the buttered popcorn pls.
Upvote
0
I'm a big fan of the R8. It's a fine camera and amazing considering it's price point. It's a beautifully made camera that feels quality and robust. It's certainly not a cynical minimum parts bin / plastic-fantastic rebel. It's a quality photographic tool.
I think a R8ii would only need a few minor upgrades to be even more effective. An EVF upgrade to the one found in the R5 would be very sweet and top of my list. Also adding the R5/R6's joystick would elevate the camera's ergonimics hugely. Suprisingly, I like having a non IBIS sensor and 24mp is more than plenty for my needs.
I'm also quite happy with the battery. It's not a R6 and shouldn't be treated as such. I tend to put my smaller non image Stabilised lenses on this camera, like my EF 35IIL or ef 11-24L which don't burn through the battery quite so fast.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
