Here are the USD prices for the Canon EOS R5, Canon EOS R6 and lenses

[geffy]

LOL Canon 100-500 f/7.1 2x the cost of Nikon’s 200-500 f/5.6 and I couldn’t care less it’s supposedly an L lens, as a f/5.6 the price would be palatable as f7.1 they are joking.

tony northrops prediction was only 1500 but he guessed the do lenses would be twice their real price, who knew

 

[1D4]

LOL Canon 100-500 f/7.1 2x the cost of Nikon’s 200-500 f/5.6 and I couldn’t care less it’s supposedly an L lens, as a f/5.6 the price would be palatable as f7.1 they are joking.

The 200-500 is also a pain to handhold at over 2 pounds heavier than the 100-500, is only 2.5x compared to 5x, is slow to focus, and has issues above 250-300mm. The comparable 5x zoom would be the Nikkor 80-400...which debuted at...wait for it...$2700.

 

[1D4]

I really hope it comes with a free EF adaptor.

Would you rather pay $4000 for a R5 with a "free" EF adapter, or $3900 without the adapter and just purchase it separately? It doesn't make any sense for Canon to bundle the adapter in when it would go to waste for people who don't need it (people brand new to Canon, people who already bought an adapter for the R/RP, people who are only using RF glass, etc.). Then there'd be a flood of adapters on the market, which would sabotage Canon's own sales of them.

 

[Toglife_Anthony]

I'm sticking with my bet...$3899 USD.

I'm just sayin'...

Now here's to hoping I get first dibs on the initial inventory.

 

[subtraho]

Better EVF

Just a note, pretty much the same EVF. Identical resolution.

 

[Baron_Karza]

So no incentive to bundle I guess.

Rumor is you get a free printer and some paper and a dab of ink

 

[Baron_Karza]

Would you rather pay $4000 for a R5 with a "free" EF adapter, or $3900 without the adapter and just purchase it separately? It doesn't make any sense for Canon to bundle the adapter in when it would go to waste for people who don't need it (people brand new to Canon, people who already bought an adapter for the R/RP, people who are only using RF glass, etc.). Then there'd be a flood of adapters on the market, which would sabotage Canon's own sales of them.

I'm willing to bet there will be way more new 1st time R body buyers than existing R body owners buying an R5/R6.
Maybe at least an option to buy it as a kit with a discounted price.

 

[DBounce]

45mp vs 61mp much more?

You’ve named a single feature... yes much much more.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

How many stock splits in that time?

Canon (CAJ) has 2 splits in our CAJ split history database. The first split for CAJ took place on August 28, 2006. This was a 3 for 2 split, meaning for each 2 shares of CAJ owned pre-split, the shareholder now owned 3 shares. For example, a 1000 share position pre-split, became a 1500 share position following the split. CAJ's second split took place on March 16, 1998. This was a 5 for 1 split, meaning for each share of CAJ owned pre-split, the shareholder now owned 5 shares. For example, a 1500 share position pre-split, became a 7500 share position following the split.

Splits are accounted for in the price I quoted and in the stock charts. They wouldn’t make much sense if they weren’t. Pull up the chart for CAJ on your own and see. It’s public information. Personally I could care less what Canon’s shares trade for but clearly share price appreciation is either not Canon’s primary goal or they are failing to reach that goal.
I’m not the one that brought share price up. Just pointing out that it doesn’t appear to be a primary driver of Canon’s behavior. Personally, I would have taken the time to actually look at the chart before I made that claim but different people have different standards I guess.
Share price appreciation as a measure of business success is common in the US but It’s possible Canon uses a different metric to measure their success. If I was trying to score points on Canon I could have pointed out that they trade for about 1/3 of what they did in 2007. Maybe they shouldn’t have split the shares in 2006. That can be a jinx. Obviously it’s tough all over for Camera companies.
Edited for clarity. Hard to post from the iPhone. Are we done with this? Anybody that starts a response to one of my posts with “No.” should be prepared to follow that with a pretty compelling argument IMO.

 

[Eclipsed]

"$3899"

I called it!

I had $3999. Happy the 100-500 is same as the RF 70-200 2.8. Seems fair.

I suspect that the crappy bundle price is because the early adopters don’t need the f4 zoom, but because they can later drop the bundle price when production catches up for a $300 “discount” that motivates more buyers but isn’t really a discount.

 

[Eclipsed]

Could the bundle have the ef-rf adaptor included? Seems a bit off, but hey

Enough RF lenses now, so an adapter isn’t needed. Besides, who wanted the crappy basic one?

 

[Bert63]

Your thinking on the 100-400 with 1.4x (560mm) versus 100-500 (already at 500mm w/out a TC) doesn't register to me. The 100-500 will be 700mm with the 1.4x, and TC tech has come a long way since the ancient EF TC designs (plus the advantage of the close flange distance of the RF mount). Also remember the 100-500 is going to have around 7-stops of combined stabilization with IS+IBIS – that won't help you with BIF or motion, but for everything else, it's going to be really nice.

Biggest reason to stay with 100-400 is saving money.

700mm at what, F/11? Ugh...

 

[frankchn]

Splits are accounted for in the price I quoted and in the stock charts. They wouldn’t make much sense if they weren’t. Pull up the chart for CAJ on your own and see. It’s public information. Personally I could care less what Canon’s shares trade for but clearly share price appreciation is either not Canon’s primary goal or they are failing to reach that goal.

Canon is not a growth stock -- none of the industries it is in are really growing much. They are a dividend stock with a yield of about 4% over the last few years.

 

[Eclipsed]

How much time and how much do you think it'll drop? I'd be surprised if that price (if correct) drops more than $200 by Christmas.

Body won’t drop by Christmas but bundle will.

 

[goldenhusky]

Sounds like the R5 has a 8k shooting limit of 20mins to cool down the camera and about 35 mins limit when recording in 4K60p. The 35 mins in 4k60p is if the recording started again right after the intitial 29:59 mins recording. The camera also has function that will automatically lowers the video resolution and frame rate if the camera heats up above certain temperature. Not sure if there is an option to stop recording instead of lowering the resolution and frame rate automatically.

 

[goldenhusky]

Both cameras can be powered using the PD charger. This will power the camera and charge the batteries at the same time.

 

[Jethro]

I suspect that limited supply, and probable high demand, will mean little or no price drops for the bodies by Xmas. Their price will drop, but it could take quite a bit longer - maybe mid-2021. Some of the lens prices might drop quicker.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

Canon is not a growth stock -- none of the industries it is in are really growing much. They are a dividend stock with a yield of about 4% over the last few years.

Nice return. I’d take that in this market. Pay the dividend on time to protect the share equity and everybody is happy.

Took another look and actually you would have lost a lot of equity with the share price decline. Even a 4% dividend would make that tough to take unless you planned to be a long term holder. In any event. I think I’ll keep investing in Canon cameras and lenses and leave shares to others with deeper pockets and less risk aversion.

 

[goldenhusky]

R6 sensor is based on the 1DX2 sensor which means the AA filter could be strong on the R6

 

[Eclipsed]

That's like saying a 21 year old new wife couldn't possibly thrill me more than the 57 year old current wife... in their bikinis. Experience isn't everything.

Yes, but does her sensor still shake more than dust?