Let’s talk Canon EOS R1, the flagship of flagships?

[David - Sydney]

Why should that be the case? The resolution expectation should be driven by the needs of the target market. Hint: there’s likely not much real overlap between the target markets for different brands’ flagship cameras.

But perhaps the target market is changing...
You could say that recent technology improvements have meant that flagship is now the jack-of-all-trades model that perhaps the mid market was previously. Bandwidth limitations etc has meant that the fastest frame rates were limited to smaller sensor resolution... we aren't really seeing that now. The use cases needing 30 or 40fps vs 20fps is for a small niche.
As you have mentioned, cashed up enthusiasts are probably as big or a larger market for bodies than professional sports/photo journalists in the past.
High mp bodies can now have fast frame rates and and the pricing/features of the Z8 show the market what is possible albeit Nikon has to hit hard to keep/improve their market share.
Yes, users are likely to stay within their OEM's ecosystem but for some people a particular lens/body combination may tempt them to switch.
For businesses looking for tools, they are more likely to get the right combination for their needs irrespective of the OEM and if they can get one body that can do high res and speed then it makes sense to avoid having 2 bodies.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It took Nikon years to recover after AF SLRs were released. I think it may take years for them to recover after the release of the Z Mount system. There were all sorts of problems when they released there first cameras. AWB, Auto Exposure and other stuff that we've had for years suddenly didn't work anymore. Nikon's live view AF in their DSLRs were quite slow and nowhere near Canon's level. Since Canon had great live view AF system they just transferred it to the EOS R series. Since it was great and working well. Canon didn't have any sort of problems that Nikon faced in the early days or mirrorless.

Up until about 2012, Canon and Nikon both had over 40% of the ILC market. Since then, Nikon lost while Sony gained, and Canon either gained slightly or stayed stable YoY. In 2017, Nikon’s losses and Sony’s gains accelerated (Canon remained stable at a bit under 50% market share).

Given that Sony only took the #2 spot from Nikon a few years ago, Nikon’s installed base is likely higher than Sony’s but both are much smaller that Canon installed base, which is likely in the 70-80% range. That means Canon’s major target market across the board comprises current Canon shooters.

 

[neuroanatomist]

But perhaps the target market is changing...

Perhaps. As I say repeatedly, Canon understands the market better than anyone here.

 

[deebatman316]

Up until about 2012, Canon and Nikon both had over 40% of the ILC market. Since then, Nikon lost while Sony gained, and Canon either gained slightly or stayed stable YoY. In 2017, Nikon’s losses and Sony’s gains accelerated (Canon remained stable at a bit under 50% market share).

Given that Sony only took the #2 spot from Nikon a few years ago, Nikon’s installed base is likely higher than Sony’s but both are much smaller that Canon installed base, which is likely in the 70-80% range. That means Canon’s major target market across the board comprises current Canon shooters.

Sony's DSLR/ DSLT cameras were NEVER popular. Most of the shooters on the A Mount system were former Minolta shooters. Sony was way out of touch with its customers. Minolta never really upgraded its mount and it was quite limiting leaving big incompatibilities. The Minolta system was heavily dependent on screw drive AF just like Pentax. When Minolta did bring out Motorized lenses (SSM, Super Sonic Motor basically Canon's Ring Type USM). Older cameras lacked the correct amount of pins to control them. So those motorized lenses wouldn't AF on older bodies. Only screw drive lenses would AF leaving a big incompatibility. In the late 80s or early 90s Minolta added 3 more additional communication pins. The A Mount originally had 5 pins they went to 8 pins. To bring ADI (Distance Encoder for TTL, In lens AF Motor & Power Zoom lenses). No A Mount lenses have ever used electronic diaphragm control. The aperture was mechanically controlled by an aperture motor in the camera body. With the lens removed from the body the lens was fully stopped down to the smallest aperture.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Sony's DSLR/ DSLT cameras were NEVER popular. Most of the shooters on the A Mount system were former Minolta shooters. Sony was way out of touch with its customers. Minolta never really upgraded its mount and it was quite limiting leaving big incompatibilities. The Minolta system was heavily dependent on screw drive AF just like Pentax. When Minolta did bring out Motorized lenses (SSM, Super Sonic Motor basically Canon's Ring Type USM). Older cameras lacked the correct amount of pins to control them. So those motorized lenses wouldn't AF on older bodies. Only screw drive lenses would AF leaving a big incompatibility. In the late 80s or early 90s Minolta added 3 more additional communication pins. The A Mount originally had 5 pins they went to 8 pins. To bring ADI (Distance Encoder for TTL, In lens AF Motor & Power Zoom lenses). No A Mount lenses have ever used electronic diaphragm control. The aperture was mechanically controlled by an aperture motor in the camera body. With the lens removed from the body the lens was fully stopped down to the smallest aperture.

Ancient history, relatively speaking. I mentioned 2012 because that was the year Sony launched their first FF MILC.

 

[deebatman316]

Ancient history, relatively speaking. I mentioned 2012 because that was the year Sony launched their first FF MILC.

I believe Sony was calling it "NEX" (New Experience Mount) at that point in time. Then it was switched to "Sony Alpha" later on. Even though there DSLR/ DSLT line was called "Sony Alpha". Which causes a lot of confusion at the time.

 

[koenkooi]

It took Nikon years to recover after AF SLRs were released. I think it may take years for them to recover after the release of the Z Mount system. There were all sorts of problems when they released there first cameras. AWB, Auto Exposure and other stuff that we've had for years suddenly didn't work anymore. Nikon's live view AF in their DSLRs were quite slow and nowhere near Canon's level. Since Canon had great live view AF system they just transferred it to the EOS R series. Since it was great and working well. Canon didn't have any sort of problems that Nikon faced in the early days or mirrorless.

And Canon has had a very successful mirrorless system since 2012, the M series, to use as a base for the R series.

 

[DhlcadR6]

Since the late 80s, Canon has been making progress step-by-step, it's not the most "innovating", but each era Canon has enough tech on hand to make good products. IMHO the worst time was the unlimited 18MP APS-C years. An even with the lack of CMOS progress, DPAF and good touch LCD controls laid solid foundation into mirrorless.

Sony/Minolta does huge progress in short time but seems to slow down after a while.(* * cough cough * * vlog cameras)

Nikon is slow to adapt new tech, but when Nikon grasp it, it's fine. The late film autofocus SLR and mirrorless transition showed.

 

[deebatman316]

And Canon has had a very successful mirrorless system since 2012, the M series, to use as a base for the R series.

Nikon did try mirrorless with the Nikon 1 system. But it failed very badly and was discontinued. It uses a smaller sensor than APS-C I believe.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Nikon did try mirrorless with the Nikon 1 system. But it failed very badly and was discontinued. It uses a smaller sensor than APS-C I believe.

The Nikon 1 system used a 1" sensor. I sort of regret not buying a Nikon 1 AW1 and the two waterproof lenses many years ago. I still occasionally consider buying them used, they'd be great for snorkeling instead of putting a camera in a bulky housing. However, when I go on trips where I can snorkel, I also dive and in that case the 15 m rating is not enough and I'd need a housing anyway. For our trip this summer, one of my kids just got her PADI OW certification, and I picked up a nice housing for my iPhone 14 Pro (40 m rating) along with a set of good lights.

 

[deebatman316]

The Nikon 1 system used a 1" sensor. I sort of regret not buying a Nikon 1 AW1 and the two waterproof lenses many years ago. I still occasionally consider buying them used, they'd be great for snorkeling instead of putting a camera in a bulky housing. However, when I go on trips where I can snorkel, I also dive and in that case the 15 m rating is not enough and I'd need a housing anyway. For our trip this summer, one of my kids just got her PADI OW certification, and I picked up a nice housing for my iPhone 14 Pro (40 m rating) along with a set of good lights.

Have you or do you shoot Nikon.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Have you or do you shoot Nikon.

No, but that would not stop me from buying a Nikon camera if there was one that met a need for me.

Or even if I just wanted not to be lying if I sing along with Paul Simon's Kodachrome.

 

[kaihp]

The banding on my R5 under indoor lighting means that eshutter is basically useless for that use case. Improvements in a R1 wouldn't entice me to upgrade though. I do wonder how well the Z9/Z8 performs though

Just curious as I've never seen banding on the R3 - what kind of banding are you seeing?

 

[ToonD]

Don't know if this is called banding but this is not what you want.

 

[kaihp]

Don't know if this is called banding but this is not what you want.

Damn, those lines in the lower image are horrible!

 

[The Professor]

I am just asking; what are the advantages of having more than 45MP?
For me, Global shutter; this is the only reason I would spend that amount of money.

I'm a bird and nature guy so the more the better...so ... I" crop ,crop, crop till I can't crop no more " lol. would not spend 10 thousand on a camera unless it something magical ..like 100 MP at 40 FPS ...yep dreaming but thats were we guys stand .. but for most all other types of shooting I guess 45 MP is enough ..or even too much . remember other Canon flagships never cared about MP but other features some Pros use . Im hoping the Mythical R5 II will be the MP king ...

 

[David - Sydney]

Just curious as I've never seen banding on the R3 - what kind of banding are you seeing?

I think that I just deleted the files since they were useless to try to fix in post. I would get a bunch of vertical bands (not lines) that had different exposures... alternating darker exposure then lighter then darker etc. This is due to the lighting system used indoors. No issues using eshutter outside of course.

 

[luftweg]

Why not go back to the way it was before the 1DX came: have two versions of the Series 1 camera; one for high speed and one for higher resolution? (or possibly pixel shift?)
Perhaps also having an R1C that has internal IDs (then again, the purists. and Cinema division might have fits).

If there's room, why not a third card slot, which could be an SD -- for the purposes of proxies, etc. (there may be instances where a CFX reader is not available, or when you want to give a pics/vids to someone who's providing 'rushes')... But if it HAS to be only two slots, then yes double CFX.

 

[kaihp]

I think that I just deleted the files since they were useless to try to fix in post. I would get a bunch of vertical bands (not lines) that had different exposures... alternating darker exposure then lighter then darker etc. This is due to the lighting system used indoors. No issues using eshutter outside of course.

Sounds suspiciously like flickering lights to me, which wasn't synchronized to the shutter. Was your shutter faster than the mains line frequency?

 

[Michael Clark]

This assumes that the R3 price will remain "as is".

It is possible that Canon will knock it down and have the R1 take over the R3's introductory MSRP.

But given the volume of digital cameras have returned to year 1999-2000 lows... it isn't that far fetch.

Check out the pricing of the EOS 5D Mark IV vs the EOS R5.

$3,499 USD in 2016, when the 5D Mark IV was introduced, had the same buying power as $3,773 USD in 2020 when the R5 was introduced. So there wasn't as much of a price increase from the 5D Mark IV to the R5 as you seem to think. $3,899 for the R5 in 2020 would have been $3,616 in 2016 USD.

That's only a 3.3% increase in terms of USD. It may have been less or more in terms of yen, depending on exchange rates.