Canon lays out their corporate strategy

[entoman]

When using the shutter count app on my mac, it doesn’t count ES shots, only EFCS shots. I don’t use MS, so I don’t know how it counts those.
My R5 camera trap got stuck, a snail crawled onto the IR trigger, and it took 5000 pictures overnight. The shutter count app showed a 5k increase, which matched the number of images on the cards.

I wouldn't expect any shutter actuation counter to count ES, as obviously there is no mechanical movement where wear could occur. For a given exposure, MS has double the opportunity for wear/breakage compared to EFCS, so I think it's very important that manufacturers clarify what they mean by an "actuation".

 

[Michael Clark]

And the APS-C lens selection is still nonexistent. We can choose between short and dark plastic zooms and slightly longer and even darker plastic zooms.

Sounds a lot like the EF-S and EF-M selections, doesn't it?

 

[Michael Clark]

Won't that be a studio camera?

Some think so. Others think it will be both very high resolution yet still blazingly fast.

 

[Michael Clark]

Here's to hoping for a 35mm f/1.2L this year

Consider that the 1998 EF 35mm f/1.4 L only finally got an update in 2015.

Compare that to the 1997 EF 24mm f/1.4L which saw the II version in 2008.

For whatever reason, Canon does not seem to have ever prioritized new 35mm top tier 35mm primes.

 

[Michael Clark]

The Panasonic-style screen solves everyone's needs as far as I can see - it can tilt (while remaining on-axis) in either horizontal or vertical modes; it can swing out just like the Canon screens, and it can reverse to face inwards to protect it. The Panasonic design is very sturdy and doesn't block any of the ports. It looks a lot sturdier than the screen on my R5. An infinitely better design IMO.

From the dpr review of the S1H:
"A large catch on the bottom of the S1H reveals that the rear screen's articulated hinge is itself mounted on a tilting platform, meaning it can be extended out from the back of the camera, ensuring no clash with the ports on the camera's left-hand side."

View attachment 207896

I just can't understand why Canon doesn't adopt the same method.

It's got an equatorial mount!

 

[Michael Clark]

It actually does help. It could be both at the same time.

Anything that cheap will sell more than anything that expensive.

That's why there are more $999 Macbook Airs laptops than $5999 Mac Pro desktops.

Or to keep to topic there are more $799 RF 600mm f/11 than $12999 RF 600mm f/4.0

I guess it all depends on whether one defines "top seller" as most units sold or most dollars spent on each model.

 

[Michael Clark]

This

Again it could be both. If I were to check Adorama it may behave similarly.

Adorama?!?!?!


In the past I've found multiple listings for the exact same product (same manufacturer's number, same bar code, same Adorama SKU) on Adorama with two different prices listed.

 

[koenkooi]

Some think so. Others think it will be both very high resolution yet still blazingly fast.

Since the Digic X was introduced early 2020, the variants have been topping out just below the 1 gigapixel per second throughput mark. I suspect that Canon is saving the big increase in throughput for the R1 announcement.
I'm slightly surprised that in 3 years since its introduction, we've only seen efficiency improvements, but looking at the line up: apart from the R5/R7, it's been 24-or-fewer MP bodies, where more throughput isn't practical due to using SD cards and relatively slow sensors.

If Canon can do its usual "dual plus" thing, that would make 90MP at 20fps attainable.

I really don't know where Canon wants to go for the R1, 90MP@20fps, 45MP@40fps, 24MP@80fps or something completely different. I do know that I'm not the target audience

 

[Michael Clark]

If Canon does come with the 35 1.2 they better keep the price in check, no more than 2k. Aside from the 1/3 stop increase in aperture over the 35mm 1.4ii there is little they could to to improve on it that would make an upgrade worth much added cost. Unlike 50 or 85mm, bokeh difference is too slight to matter.

If there's little to no improvement over the existing EF 35mm f/1.4 L II, why would those who already own the EF lens be interested in an RF version? One would expect that the vast majority of potential interest in an RF 35/1.4 or 1.2 would from those who already own an EF 35 L?

The EF 35 L works just as well on RF bodies as it does on EF bodies.

That may be why we haven't seen it yet. The EF 35mm f/1.4 L II is only 8 years old.

 

[Michael Clark]

Heaven forbid that I should defend Sony on a Canon user's website, but I know people, mostly birders, who genuinely love using their Sony cameras. They're not as bad, ergonomically, as people make out - but just like any time that we switch brands, it takes a while to adapt and get used to new controls and a new way of working.

By way of example, when I started *digital* photography, I switched from a Nikon D50 to a Sony a700. It took a few weeks, but after that I found the Sony very easy and enjoyable to use. When the a700 had been out for 3 years with no sign of an upgrade coming, I decided to switch to a Canon 50D. At first I found the Canon controls to be weird and a bit awkward, but I've been using Canon gear for 12 years now, and now it's Sony, Nikon and Panasonic that feel awkward...

People will always feel most comfortable with something that is familiar. If folk that find a particular brand or model awkward, they just haven't allowed enough time to adjust.

There's a lot of truth to the idea that what one is used to feels most comfortable.

At the same time, though, not all products are equally ergonomic. Not all menu systems are equally intuitive.

It's easier for a novice to adapt to a product that is optimized for the characteristics of human hands than to adapt to one that is not as optimized to fit human hands.

Perhaps the average hand sizes found in humans from one region of the world to another will, to a degree, influence which product is more or less ergonomic? Perhaps the differences in thinking processes between different cultures (primarily, it seems, influenced by what language one natively speaks) can make one menu system more intuitive to some folks and less intuitive than other menu systems?

But in the end, some products are better designed and more intuitive to use than others.

 

[Michael Clark]

Another pal of mine bought a secondhand 1Dx, having convinced himself that it was perfect for his needs. He's a big strong lad, but 6 months later he sold it and said it was too heavy to use for more than half an hour. I borrowed his camera a couple of times and found it extremely comfortable for the first few minutes, due to the big grip and wide control placement, but ridiculously heavy, and too cumbersome for regular use.

He should have gotten a Canon EOS 1D X instead of one of those cheap Chinese Canikon 1Dx knockoffs.

 

[Michael Clark]

Cameras are usually either dead-on-arrival or they last forever, so the value of long warranties is debatable. The only item likely to wear out and fail is the shutter, and most cameras these days have a minimum (mechanical) shutter life expectancy of at least 100,000 actuations. That's 33,333 and a bit actuations per year over 3 years, or 20,000 actuations over 5 years. So if you shoot a bucketload of high speed bursts every day, and you use mechanical shutter, a long warranty might have some value. Otherwise, probably not.

IS units tend to be the Achilles heel of most high end lenses. And don't even ask Sony about cracks in the brackets that hold their sensors in their IBIS units. We'll see in a couple of more years if Canon IBIS units have the same history.

 

[Michael Clark]

I don't have any concerns about the shutter life of my R5! ... even if I keep it 10 years, I'm sure it will still work fine. It varies from year to year, but I took about 20K shots last year and expect to be around the same level in 2023. Incidentally, I don't just photograph butterflies - I tackle all wildlife from aphids to elephants, also birds, fungi, flowers, lichens and just about anything else in the natural world. I also do a fair bit of landscape photography.

Getting back to shutter life expectancy, I've never been clear (and neither have the manufacturers, AFAIK) about what constitutes an "actuation".

With mechanical, the shutter is open for viewing, then closes, then opens for the exposure, closes again to end the exposure, and then reopens for viewing - so does that count as 4 actuations, or 2, or one?

And what about EFCS, where the shutter just closes to end the exposure, and then opens again for viewing?

If a shutter lasts for 500,000 actuations with mechanical shutter, presumably it will last for 1,000,000 actuations with EFCS?

No. It's always the same curtain that closes and then reopens in EFCS. The other curtain never moves.

 

[Michael Clark]

I'm not so sure about that. Not all camera suppliers have the same warranty and 5 years is definitely unusual in the market.

Yes, the consumer protection laws give protection for reasonable expectation of lifespan eg Apple moved to 2 year warranty as they were being sold under 2 year telco agreements which was inconsistent with their 1 year warranty policy at the time. How the reasonable lifespan is calculated is debatable for each industry.
Sony et al will avoid paying on any post-warranty issue unless someone engages Fair Trading etc to give some muscle when dealing with them.

Some things that could contribute to shorter lifespans are the hotshoe weakness and potentially shorter component lifespan due to Canon's decision to allow higher internal temperatures but that only affects 3 video modes and so the number of users using that heavily is likely to a smaller group overall.

Ultimately, the value to consumer and cost to the manufacturer for extended warranties depend on original design and manufacturing quality. If it is great then piece of mind for us and low cost to Canon.

Just a wild guess, but maybe it's Sony's 2-year model replacement cycle vs. Canon's 4-5 year model replacement cycle? A product's expected lifespan might be defined by when the replacement model is typically expected?

 

[Michael Clark]

#hanshotfirst

#songofthesouth

Disney won't even play the song 'Zippadee-doo-dah' (who cares how it's supposed to be spelled?) in their parks any more because, even though it does not contain anything currently considered politically incorrect, it was included in a movie that does contain things offensive to more modern conventions.

 

[Michael Clark]

I guess there's an art to it, but maybe we should train our noses to select/position the AF point!

I can see the headline now:

"Canon releases EOS R1 Flagship Camera with Nasal-Control AF!"

 

[entoman]

No. It's always the same curtain that closes and then reopens in EFCS. The other curtain never moves.

For the purposes of this discussion, I'm regarding an "actuation" as a single up or down movement of a shutter curtain, because it is the number of up and down movements that creates wear. Manufacturers may define an "actuation" differently, which is the real point of the discussion. Manufacturers don't specify whether they're talking about EFCS actuations, or MS actuations, so we don't know how many *exposures* they are claiming.

So, I believe the following is correct:

EFCS = 2 actuations per exposure (same curtain closes, exposure, then reopens)

and MS = 4 actuations per exposure (first curtain drops to close, reopens, exposure, first curtain lifts, exposure, second curtain lifts to close, then drops to allow viewing to resume)

.... and of course, ES = zero actuations per exposure

 

[koenkooi]

The "R8 has not mechanical shutter!!!" 'controversy' on the interwebs has shown that most people have never seen how a 'normal' shutter works, so here's a short video that shows it:

I'm still curious how a leaf shutter would perform on modern MILCs, but not curious enough to rent a Hasselblad x2d

 

[entoman]

Since the Digic X was introduced early 2020, the variants have been topping out just below the 1 gigapixel per second throughput mark. I suspect that Canon is saving the big increase in throughput for the R1 announcement.
I'm slightly surprised that in 3 years since its introduction, we've only seen efficiency improvements, but looking at the line up: apart from the R5/R7, it's been 24-or-fewer MP bodies, where more throughput isn't practical due to using SD cards and relatively slow sensors.

If Canon can do its usual "dual plus" thing, that would make 90MP at 20fps attainable.

I really don't know where Canon wants to go for the R1, 90MP@20fps, 45MP@40fps, 24MP@80fps or something completely different. I do know that I'm not the target audience

What would be really nice, is if the R1 provided the following user-selectable options:

90MP RAW
45MP pixel-binned "RAW"
22.5MP pixel-binned "RAW"

At 20fps it should be possible to shoot 2 different resolutions simultaneously, to different cards.

The number of occasions when 30fps or faster is needed are very rare, even with sports & wildlife photography, although even 160fps would probably be needed for handheld HDR/focus stacking with moving subjects, to minimise subject and camera movement between successive frames.

All academic to me unfortunately, as I'm never likely to be able to afford an R1...

 

[roby17269]

Consider that the 1998 EF 35mm f/1.4 L only finally got an update in 2015.

Compare that to the 1997 EF 24mm f/1.4L which saw the II version in 2008.

For whatever reason, Canon does not seem to have ever prioritized new 35mm top tier 35mm primes.

I had hoped that the introduction of a new mount (RF) would have changed things?
I know they have already the RF 35 1.8 IS, but I am not going to buy it just to sell it when the L will finally arrive. (that's just me, I do not like having duplication in my lens set - if I had both the 35 1.8 and the future L I know which one I would use all the time and which one will linger in the drawer gathering dust)