Here are some crazy Canon EOS R1 specifications [CR0]

[Jack Douglas]

Can you? It seems the R5 can't be set to shoot slower than 20 fps in electronic shutter mode.

I haven't yet bought the R5 so I can't answer that but all I would care about is the number in a burst. If Canon doesn't allow that control, it's an oversight or bad design.

Jack

 

[Michael Clark]

Someone has way too much time on his hands...

Someone else needs to mind their own business. I don't tell you how to budget your time. You don't need to waste your time worrying about how I spend mine on the one or two days a month I even visit this site.

 

[bernie_king]

Maybe not so crazy anymore... If the R3 is 45mp + this could actually be close.

 

[Bdbtoys]

Can you? It seems the R5 can't be set to shoot slower than 20 fps in electronic shutter mode.

Can limit in non-electronic. However they really need to come out with a firmware that lets you set the limit in electronic.

 

[GoldWing]

No I'm not a typical consumer I work for one of the largest sports agencies in the world. I would be replacing 24 kits and for us that's 56 bodies and their associated glass.

There is (are) no benefit(s) of a governed or limited 20MP that cannot be adjusted while shooting.

This technology has been in camera since the 1DX and its very simple to shoot at a reduced file size in RAW and JPG. This 20MP, straw dog or red harring is played out. If someone wants to shoot at 20MP let them perhaps they want to shoot at 8MP, let them. But there is no reason to limit the resolution any longer, that thinking and technology was even in the original 1DX in 2011/2

One has to wonder why people don't look at A1, R5, Nikon z, and even the 1DXMKIII and realize decreasing file size is eazy on "the buffer" ROFL.

It's about time our industry matured with equipment that is comprehensive.

Hi 100% of the pro sports photographers I know and work

No I'm not a typical consumer I work for one of the largest sports agencies in the world. I would be replacing 24 kits and for us that's 56 bodies and their associated glass.

There is (are) no benefit(s) of a governed or limited 20MP that cannot be adjusted while shooting.

This technology has been in camera since the 1DX and its very simple to shoot at a reduced file size in RAW and JPG. This 20MP, straw dog or red harring is played out. If someone wants to shoot at 20MP let them perhaps they want to shoot at 8MP, let them. But there is no reason to limit the resolution any longer, that thinking and technology was even in the original 1DX in 2011/2

One has to wonder why people don't look at A1, R5, Nikon z, and even the 1DXMKIII and realize decreasing file size is eazy on "the buffer" ROFL.

It's about time our industry matured with equipment that is comprehensive.

Hi 100% of the sports photogs I know, work with and work for our agency would welcome the oppty for enhanced resolution and be able to choose the file size. No one!!! Not one single person said "I don't want greater resolution and the ability to choose when I want to use it".

 

[BakaBokeh]

Hi 100% of the pro sports photographers I know and work

Hi 100% of the sports photogs I know, work with and work for our agency would welcome the oppty for enhanced resolution and be able to choose the file size. No one!!! Not one single person said "I don't want greater resolution and the ability to choose when I want to use it".

You'd be surprised. Some here get irrationally angry when you give them options that they can just turn off if they don't want to use it.

 

[Ozarker]

Finally, a camera that’s useful. No more worries when a model decides she needs to blink. Thank you, Canon.

 

[pape2]

I wonder if with todays tech it would be possible to do deep focus tech to R1.
R5 got some sensor deepness ,if i remember right there was mode with two diferently focused frame option from one picture.
Now if Global shutter R1 can divide longer exposures to shorter segments, is it possible track single photons tracks on segment like 1/1000 s or 1/10000s.?
i mean if can get info where photon hits surface of sensor and where it hits to lower layer, can get knowledge about photons flying angle.
When knowing photon track angles can do picture where everything is sharp .Like sensor shift.
How many milliard or billion photons hits to sensor when doing exposure? How big computer is needed to postprocess all that data

 

[pape2]

I wonder if with todays tech it would be possible to do deep focus tech to R1.
R5 got some sensor deepness ,if i remember right there was mode with two diferently focused frame option from one picture.
Now if Global shutter R1 can divide longer exposures to shorter segments, is it possible track single photons tracks on segment like 1/1000 s or 1/10000s.?
i mean if can get info where photon hits surface of sensor and where it hits to lower layer, can get knowledge about photons flying angle.
When knowing photon track angles can do picture where everything is sharp .Like sensor shift.
How many milliard or billion photons hits to sensor when doing exposure? How big computer is needed to postprocess all that data

OK i lost scale ,they getting perfectly sharp pictures with 1/10000s ,means billions photons hitting sensor. no way track them.
And anyway million times easier use stacked sensor data for this.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

ND filters feel like a waste of light to be. They filter away 99.9% of the light, but none of the noise. If you could still catch all that like and then devide it by 1000 afterwards, you would als devide the noise by 1000.

 

[kaihp]

ND filters feel like a waste of light to be. They filter away 99.9% of the light, but none of the noise. If you could still catch all that like and then devide it by 1000 afterwards, you would als devide the noise by 1000.

With an ND filter, you can shoot at a much wider aperture and long shutters and not blowing up the exposure.

 

[SteveC]

With an ND filter, you can shoot at a much wider aperture and long shutters and not blowing up the exposure.

Or to put that another way, if your exposure has blown highlights, dividing by 1000 as skyscraperfan suggests, would simply lead to uniform dark gray areas where the blown highlights were before.

It also uses up ten stops of dynamic range.

 

[kaihp]

Or to put that another way, if your exposure has blown highlights, dividing by 1000 as skyscraperfan suggests, would simply lead to uniform dark gray areas where the blown highlights were before.

It also uses up ten stops of dynamic range.

Using ND filters gives you the option to make artistic pictures with a very long shutter and a very shallow depth of field. You may not like it, but some of us do.

 

[SteveC]

Using ND filters gives you the option to make artistic pictures with a very long shutter and a very shallow depth of field. You may not like it, but some of us do.

Oh, I understand perfectly what an ND would be a good thing in some circumstances! (I was trying to support what you said. If that was unclear I apologize.)

One typical use case is those long exposures of waterfalls to blur the water. (Not necessarily done wide open, shallow depth of field, but definitely done with a long exposure.) I've never tried to do this, if only because of there not being a lot of waterfalls near where I live.

 

[LSXPhotog]

Holy smokes this got extremely off topic.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Holy smokes this got extremely off topic.

I disagree. The thread title has the word ‘crazy’ in it, I think that means all bets are off.

 

[kaihp]

I was trying to support what you said. If that was unclear I apologize.

Sorry, I definitely missed that. My bad. I should take more care to read and understand, before replying.

 

[AEWest]

Holy smokes this got extremely off topic.

Welcome to Canon Rumors forum.

 

[Antono Refa]

The EOS1 series tipically not high resolution cameras. I don't think 85Mpix is real. Global shutter is.

Could be 85M photo sites, or 21.2MP.

 

[usern4cr]

Could be 85M photo sites, or 21.2MP.

Well, 85M photo sites would still be a claimed "85M pixels" since Canon (& most everyone) use a Bayer filter and extrapolate colors so each site now has full color reported as their "85 MPixel sensor resolution". The R5 has 45M photo sites, and they extrapolate it to 45MPixels, so they won't be changing that.

However, some of Canon's photo sites are called "dual-pixel" and in the future might be called "quad pixel" , for AF purposes. I don't know if this applies to every photo-site across the entire sensor or just for the much smaller number of declared AF points on it. If it was "quad-pixel AF" on each photo site of the entire sensor, then I could see them calling each of the 4 sites (of the quad-pixel) as a published number as a way to increase their claimed marketing numbers 4 fold to increase bragging rights, since they could just claim "85M" when they actually boil it down to 21.2 MPixels.