Here are the full Canon EOS R specifications

[unfocused]

...Although a f/2 lens is an f/2 lens, a M43 sensor is smaller than a FF sensor and hence M43 f/2 lens is slower than a FF f/2 lens...

Wrong.

 

[3kramd5]

Yeah, I hear you. But still, wobbly lenses are in the path of light and not at the plane of the focused image. Just seems more trouble prone. I'd rather we get all lenses up to speed than throw a blanket solution into the body.

Easy peasy, just put a sensor in each lens and just connect it to the body for digitization and processing.

 

[tron]

I believe that 5DMkIV may still have the advantage against R. I do like my 5DMkIV a lot and I do not feell the need to get an R. However we must admit that alhough not revolutionary the R gives access to two new interesting lenses (the 28-70 and the 50).

 

[neuroanatomist]

I may get an R. But it will more likely be a 5DsR than an EOS R.

 

[Aaron D]

True enough that the more complex a system is, the more that can go wrong, however, it’s hard to argue that IBIS is not beneficial to images shot at relatively slow shudder speeds using lenses that do not have IS built-in.

Agreed, but I'd rather all lenses (that need it) were brought up to speed with IS. In my case, my normal zoom, long zoom and 35 fixed are all IS and only my TSE lenses are not. So, I'd be paying for IBIS and living with the added complexity for NO good reason.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

This may be neither here nor there, but there is more to it than light volume. There is also a geometric difference (incident angle of the light rays being sampled), so I’m not sure it’s fair to assume something like “camera x is AF sensitive at -6EV using a f/1.2 lens, therefore it will be AF sensitive at -5EV using an f/1.8 lens.”

It's a reasonable assumption as when you stop the aperture down it decreases the amount of light and it's the main factor here. That is, at f1.8 the lens needs to receive 2 times more light in order for the sensor to receive the same amount of light as with f1.2.

 

[amorse]

This group seems pretty heated up over the features (or lack there of) on this camera. It hasn't even been announced yet: I'm sure we will learn more tomorrow.

I'm going to hold judgement until I hear Canon announce it in full.

 

[ecpu]

I'm waiting on the full release before making my final decision. It's going to be the EOS R or Sony A7III. If the current specs are complete and accurate, it will be A7III because EOS R doesn't offer what I'm looking for on the video side. Either way, I'm excited to be close to getting a nice upgrade from my 6DII !

 

[ahsanford]

I believe that 5DMkIV may still have the advantage against R. I do like my 5DMkIV a lot and I do not feell the need to get an R. However we must admit that alhough not revolutionary the R gives access to two new interesting lenses (the 28-70 and the 50).

The 5D4 will be able to do more that you already do today. But until the EOS R is launched, we don't know about the new that this camera offers.

- A

 

[tron]

I'm waiting on the full release before making my final decision. It's going to be the EOS R or Sony A7III. If the current specs are complete and accurate, it will be A7III because EOS R doesn't offer what I'm looking for on the video side. Either way, I'm excited to be close to getting a nice upgrade from my 6DII !

You could already have a nice upgrade from your 6DII by getting a 5DMkIV

Edit: I just saw that you referred to video so that remains to be seen indeed. Apologies from a stills hobbist!

 

[Kit.]

Just about every camera sold has a inbuilt image stabilising system,
if you turn your camera over and look on the base plate you will see a threaded socket.
be amazed all you IBIS moaners, its been there all the time.

There is also a hot shoe on top of the camera. But...

Too bad there are places where meaningful use of any of them is not allowed.

 

[ecpu]

You could alreafy have a nice upgrade from your 6DII by getting a 5DMkIV

Unfortunately that is only true for the photo side of things. 5DMkIV isn't so great on the video side either, because Canon crippled it with a poor codec and massive crop. Had that not been the case, I wouldn't even be looking at EOS R or Sony A7III because I'd already have a 5DMkIV.

 

[3kramd5]

It's a reasonable assumption as when you stop the aperture down it decreases the amount of light and it's the main factor here. That is, at f1.8 the lens needs to receive 2 times more light in order for the sensor to receive the same amount of light as with f1.2.

I don’t disagree with your arithmetic. However that may not be the whole story. Perhaps the pixel architecture is “better” at reading phase difference from wider angles, in addition to with more light. Granted, DPAF is architecturally different and since the pixels are used for imaging perhaps the micro lenses alleviate orientation.

All I’m getting at is: I would not assume it is entirely a function of the volume of light.

 

[tron]

Unfortunately that is only true for the photo side of things. 5DMkIV isn't so great on the video side either, because Canon crippled it with a poor codec and massive crop. Had that not been the case, I wouldn't even be looking at EOS R or Sony A7III because I'd already have a 5DMkIV.

I have seen that you referred to video and had already edited my post but you replied faster than my edit!

 

[jayphotoworks]

On a side note, for video work, here are some of my personal opinions/anecdotes and what the EOS R means to me right now:

I use 1080p120 quite a bit for creative shots and IBIS is also quite useful for certain camera movements on a monopod, sandbag, etc. especially in run and gun situations. I would like to think dual slots are almost standard equipment these days on bodies $2000+, but perhaps YMMV when it comes to your own risk assessment or needs. I personally shoot dual card video on my Sony bodies as I don't always have the chance for a re-shoot, but then again not every camera system with dual slots can also dual record video. I also don't see any specs on the HDMI output either, although these days I'm mainly using my hybrid kit for work that doesn't require 10bit 4:2:2, so I'm no longer externally recording. Internally, Sony's 8bit 4:2:0 internal record gives me around 2.5 hours of 4K recording time on a 128GB card which is similar to IPB 4K on the EOS R. Canon's ALL-I would be a step up in quality and a little easier in the editing suite, but I wouldn't want to swap 128GB cards ~30mins or so (in tandem on my Sony if it had that option). I also find that LOG gamma on the Sony falls apart quickly outside of basic color correction work, so the omission of LOG on the EOS R isn't really a deal breaker either. On a hybrid system, I prefer a compromise that favors fast workflow with some latitude for basic color correction over a high quality space intensive codec. I prefer to use my cinema equipment for anything that exceeds those requirements.

The rest I could live with, but not enough at this point for me to consider adding this to my kit even though I currently have both GM and EF L lenses. Nonetheless, I do like the startup time of 0.9sec on the EOS R. It does seem like an eternity to fire up my Sony A7R3/A73/A9. I also like the top display and like always DPAF is phenomenally better than just about everyone else in the market when it comes to video AF. I was spoiled by the focus guide on the C200.

I really had hoped for a true "sexy solution" for mounting EF lenses, but if the adapter route with a control ring is considered sexy, I would hate to have Canon set me up on a blind date with someone "just average.." I'm also curious how this new RF lens ecosystem will impact future EOS C bodies that have EF mounts.

Perhaps there will be a EOS R body catered to pros in 2019 at which point I can re-evaluate my Sony system.

 

[Deleted member 378875]

Just about every camera sold has a inbuilt image stabilising system,
if you turn your camera over and look on the base plate you will see a threaded socket.
be amazed all you IBIS moaners, its been there all the time.

I'd love to see you trying to get my sulky teenage kids to pose for a photo ...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Fixed ISO 400 in bulb mode? what does that mean? that kills the camera for long exposure/landscape photography. Very strange limitation. Absolutely a no-go for me.

Just noticed this – that applies if ISO is set to Auto; same behavior with a flash mounted. As long as you’re selecting an ISO yourself instead of letting the camera do so, you can set whatever ISO you want for bulb mode.

 

[ecpu]

On a side note, for video work, here are some of my personal opinions/anecdotes and what the EOS R means to me right now:

I use 1080p120 quite a bit for creative shots and IBIS is also quite useful for certain camera movements on a monopod, sandbag, etc. especially in run and gun situations. I would like to think dual slots are almost standard equipment these days on bodies $2000+, but perhaps YMMV when it comes to your own risk assessment or needs. I personally shoot dual card video on my Sony bodies as I don't always have the chance for a re-shoot, but then again not every camera system with dual slots can also dual record video. I also don't see any specs on the HDMI output either, although these days I'm mainly using my hybrid kit for work that doesn't require 10bit 4:2:2, so I'm no longer externally recording. Internally, Sony's 8bit 4:2:0 internal record gives me around 2.5 hours of 4K recording time on a 128GB card which is similar to IPB 4K on the EOS R. Canon's ALL-I would be a step up in quality and a little easier in the editing suite, but I wouldn't want to swap 128GB cards ~30mins or so (in tandem on my Sony if it had that option). I also find that LOG gamma on the Sony falls apart quickly outside of basic color correction work, so the omission of LOG on the EOS R isn't really a deal breaker either. On a hybrid system, I prefer a compromise that favors fast workflow with some latitude for basic color correction over a high quality space intensive codec. I prefer to use my cinema equipment for anything that exceeds those requirements.

The rest I could live with, but not enough at this point for me to consider adding this to my kit even though I currently have both GM and EF L lenses. Nonetheless, I do like the startup time of 0.9sec on the EOS R. It does seem like an eternity to fire up my Sony A7R3/A73/A9. I also like the top display and like always DPAF is phenomenally better than just about everyone else in the market when it comes to video AF. I was spoiled by the focus guide on the C200.

I really had hoped for a true "sexy solution" for mounting EF lenses, but if the adapter route with a control ring is considered sexy, I would hate to have Canon set me up on a blind date with someone "just average.." I'm also curious how this new RF lens ecosystem will impact future EOS C bodies that have EF mounts.

Perhaps there will be a EOS R body catered to pros in 2019 at which point I can re-evaluate my Sony system.

Thanks for this... lots of good information here from someone with experience.

My photo/video needs have shifted over the last year and I find myself doing more video work now... my current workload is probably 70/30 video/photo. I'm in need of a better video system and would much prefer a single camera that does both photo and video well as opposed to separate photo and video cameras. For that reason, the Sony A7III might come out on top for me, depending on whether or not this EOS R has anything else to offer that hasn't been shown yet.

 

[Basil]

Right off the bat I'm disappointed there are not dual card slots (CF/SD and actually with 4k video I'd like to see CF Fast. Otherwise, it has some impressive specs. I would wait a while to see what real-world reviews say regarding things like dynamic range (a BIG one for me), AF performance, etc. I'd like to see head-to-head comparison with Canon 5D Mark IV (which is currently on my wish list - could this replace it? )

 

[Quarkcharmed]

I don’t disagree with your arithmetic. However that may not be the whole story. Perhaps the pixel architecture is “better” at reading phase difference from wider angles, in addition to with more light. Granted, DPAF is architecturally different and since the pixels are used for imaging perhaps the micro lenses alleviate orientation.

All I’m getting at is: I would not assume it is entirely a function of the volume of light.

Maybe. But in the specs they only give us EVs and aperture, so as above, I think I made a reasonable assumption.

Anyway, based on what I estimated here, my guess is, the R will have roughly the same sensor as 5D4 in terms of DR and low light capabilities.