Upvote
0
Canon Interview: EOS R1 is the true flagship
- Thread starter Richard CN
- Start date
And does not measure actual camera DR.
If your definition defines something else then it is not relating to the initial thing, is it ?
The rest of your post contains clues to how the imagery is re-processed and makes cameras look more similar despite the advantages and limitations in which they differ. I've given a few more in previous posts.
Btw prints cannot match camera captured DR. Light & physics 201.
Also, digital camera properties and prints are completely different domains, this is mixing apples and oranges. Or for a better analogy, like evaluating apples through twice-baked apple pie.
"Oh they all taste the same/similar. Therefore > they are."
"You stand this much away from a yay big photo printed this way > therefore camera properties are almost the same".
No point in addressing this non-sequitur logic really. No wonder youtube gear-preachers scratch heads at a 24Mp flagship forcing gear developer to stress "Uhm yes, it's a flagship".
To be clear on these tests - I'm not criticising this man's testing methodology, it makes sense in its proper context.
What I am saying is that it can easily be (and in many cases is) taken out of context and misinterpreted, and that conclusions about camera DR cannot be made on these because this is not camera DR and that there is much more to camera performance, where advantages of larger pixels become apparent.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
There's nothing to contradict. You are correct, larger pixels have better performance at the pixel level. As long as that's what you care most about, you can remain comfortable in your µm-sized bubble.
For those people who prefer to use cameras to take actual pictures, the conclusions are quite different.
Same size pixels, smaller sensor:
Larger pixels, same size sensor ('engineering' DR, rather than photographic DR):
I am done with this discussion, you keep measurebating to your
Upvote
0
No, it doesn't work that way.
Larger pixels bring superior camera imaging performance overall. They enable superior highlight handling, max saturation, tonal rollof to clip, superior DR usability (lattitude) superior subtle tone differentiation, superior separation, superior overall RGB consistency, superior saturation and definition across the exposure range, superior texture and noise stability/consistency and lower chroma noise in underexposure extremes.
All of which applies to the whole image not just a frikking pixel and none of which can be compensated by downscaling, or looking at print from Mars.
= > now about that bubble...
...
I appreciate the effort and assume best intent but you can save your charts, I've been doing this for a while and have diagnosed this enough times and in greater depth, from $1000 to $100000 cameras.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Thanks for sharing. Seems to fit with overall trends for the higher end of the market, which seems consistent with the respondent pool.Maybe to add to the "Whats next" question:
Here is a survey from a german tech website, asking people about their habits with cameras / smartphones. A few interesting insights.
Q: When buying a new camera it will probably be:
1. a new smartphone
2. a small compact camera
3. a proper, but fixed lens camera
4. a ILC
View attachment 218996
Q: Do you have a dedicated camera? what kind is it?
1. digital camera with integrated lens
2. fixed focal length digital camera
3. DSLR
4. MILC
5. Analog camera
6. Instant camera
7. something else
8. No, but I would like to have one
9. No, and I dont want one
10. No, but I had one in the past
View attachment 218997
Q: What sensor size does your camera have?
1. Smaller than 1 inch
2. 1 inch
3. MFT
4. APS-C
5. Full Frame
6. Medium Format
7. Does not have a sensor aka analog camera
View attachment 218998
Q: What brand is your camera?
View attachment 218999
Q: How many lenses do you own?
View attachment 219000
Source: https://www.computerbase.de/2024-08/fotografie-wie-nehmt-ihr-fotos-auf-mit-smartphone-oder-dslm/
I hope this is interesting to some of youIt might be only a small sample within a "tech bubble" community, but nice to see nonetheless. Cheers
- A preference for smartphones as the primary camera
- Lots of people still using a DSLR
- The ratio of APS-C to FF is lower than the market as a whole (consistent with the tech focus) and thus Sony is better represented (but still trailing Canon)
- Most users have 2-3 lenses (the broader market data suggest most people buy a 2-lens camera kit and probably many add a 50/1.8)
Upvote
0
Flagship or not it doesn't seem like it is going to be a huge success.
https://photorumors.com/2024/07/19/...lop-based-on-the-number-of-pre-orders-so-far/
https://photorumors.com/2024/07/19/...lop-based-on-the-number-of-pre-orders-so-far/
Upvote
0
No, not at all, but I think you may have missed the point. Do we need another R3 that costs a lot more? For me, moving from a 30mp to a 45mp was almost a cosmic experience. It was like the first time I used a 6x6 camera and saw the benefits of a large negative size. Canon doesn't have to match Sony, but they need to consider the capabilities of the product line and the needs of photographers. Certainly, for photojournalists, give them a camera like the R3, but for every photojournalist, there are thousands of photographers who are not photojournalists. If Canon offered a medium format, I'd buy one as I need a high-resolution image and not 30 FPS. I don't think I've ever taken an electronic shutter shot and I feel that my needs mirror those of a big part of professional and semi-pro photographers. I feel that the R1 or possibly R1X is that the camera ticks every box not just the ones that appeal to photojournalists. That is a flagship and not just one that checks some of the boxes.
Upvote
0
The point is that when Canon launched the R3, they explicitly stated it wasn’t the flagship and that the R1 was coming. Now, the R1 is here. If it doesn’t meet your expectations, that’s not Canon’s problem.
What makes you think they didn’t? Oh, because they didn’t consider your needs. Got it.
That’s fine. When Canon makes you the CEO or at least the head of the Imaging Division, you can decide what features the flagship will have. Until then, your only choice about the R1 is whether or not to buy it, and Canon doesn’t care what you personally do.
Of course, you’re welcome to complain about Canon’s decisions online, for all the good that will do.
Upvote
0
And that is the unanswered question that I suspect is what confuses everybody (including me).
What, of the small differences between the R1 and R3, makes one officially a "Flagship" and the other explicitly not.
If both were "Flagship" bodies or neither were, I don't think anyone would care that much but they seem only trivially different, no more than you'd expect for a three year later update, and designed for exactly the same audience.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I suspect the point was that the 1D X III was the flagship, and remained so until the R1 came along to replace it...and it is doing so right on schedule. As to what differentiates it from the R3, it could be as simple (in Canon's view) as the cross-type AF. Personally, I found the inability of the R3 (and every other Canon MILC) to focus on horizontal lines to be a step back from DSLRs.
At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter what comprises a 'flagship'. For Canon, it's the R1. For Nikon it's the Z9. For Sony, it's the...well, I'm actually not sure...is it the a1 or the a9III? People are hung up on this, but I doubt many buyers really care. Does the camera have the features you want or not? Can you afford it or not? Those matter.
Canon will sell a lot more R5II bodies than R1 bodies, and they announced them concurrently for a reason. Both are intended to serve the pro and prosumer markets, regardless of which one Canon calls the flagship.
Upvote
0
Had Canon not been explicit in saying the R3 is not a flagship and equally explicit in saying the R1 is a flagship, I'd agree. But they did make both statements so they should be explaining why.
Upvote
0
Explain what? The R1 is a 1-series camera, consistent with the 1-series legacy. Canon gets to decide what they call their flagship.
Upvote
0
It’s all marketing at the end of the day. They released a 1-series just the year prior and reasonably didn’t want to upset those customers by releasing a 1-series mirrorless the following year. At the same time the Olympics got postponed to 2021, and they wanted something for that hype season. Had it not been for those unusual circumstances the R3 may well never have existed.
Upvote
0
And confusing marketing hurts just like good marketing helps. Whether Canon said "Flagship" either time was marketing. Calling the new body R1 rather than R3 Mark II or RS or LMNOP is nothing but marketing. Canon chose, twice, to use the "flagship" term to define a product's marketing. That they caused confusion as a result is also marketing.
Upvote
0
And gets to explain what they mean by the term. And gets to own the confusion and uncertainty when they don't.
Upvote
0
I agree, I never said they did a good job with the marketing. It doesn’t help that the other two companies in the mean time released very different “flagships” from what we’re used to creating the impression that there’s an industry shift. And certainly a lot of people seem to be confused with them having two separate lines with near identical functionality targeting the same market.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
