R1 Camera

Hector1970

EOS R
Mar 22, 2012
1,191
360
That's not naive. Corporate pride and public relations notwithstanding, ultimately, Canon has to sell cameras.

The R5, if it delivers as promised (and currently there is cause for optimism that it will for stills shooters), leaves little space in the market for a body that will cost $7,000 and only offers better weather sealing and an integrated battery grip.

I do shoot sports professionally (or at least I did until last spring. I'll be limited to cross country and maybe golf and swimming this fall, with the hope that other fall sports will be possible in the spring). I bought the 1Dx III because it is tried and true and the III corrects the main issues with the II as far as I was concerned (better autofocus). At some point I will want to replace my 5DIV and if I do, it will be with an R5. Never say "never," but with the features the R5 offers, I don't think an R1 would even enter into the equation.

I know it's dangerous to extrapolate from a sample of two, but with the 1 series, small numbers of customers can make a big difference. If your viewpoint is representative of just a small percentage of enthusiasts and mine is representative of a small percentage of professionals, that's still a chunk of potential R1 sales. I would wager that most of the people on this forum drooling over an R1 are not going to buy one. Add to that the shrinking professional market and the disastrous impact of COVID-19 and I agree, I think the business case for an R1 got a lot harder with the release of the R5.

Now, I'm not saying it won't ever happen. Canon has the numbers, not us, but I suspect the camera has dropped several notches on the priority list.
I'd agree with the sentiments here. I think it is hard to justify the premium of the 1DX III over the 5R. It would be even harder to justify 1R with that type of price gap. The 1DXIII makes the 5R look like good value (which will help the sales of the 5R). The 1DX III copes so easily with 20MP I think it could easily have coped with 30MP. Other than the given better weather sealing and bigger battery in which ways would a 1R be better than a 5R. The 5R can do 20 FPS. FPS becomes a diminishing return. Other than the heating issue Canon will find it hard to meaningfully improve over the R5. Focussing can still be better. The 1DXIII is good on big objects but less accurate on small objects like birds moving erratically. I'm sure eventually a camera will be track small moving objects even in unclear backgrounds
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,707
2,695
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
...perfect silent shooting is of the highest importance for a journalism now, might be nice for wildlife if you are up close.
Silent shooting was the main reason I bought an R. The 1D series are notoriously noisy. But, if I did a Venn Diagram, the intersection between when I need silent shooting and when I need a 1D style body is about non-existent.
 

neurorx

EOS 90D
May 12, 2015
124
62
I think I would have liked a better battery with the R5. It does make me wonder what an R1 would look like in specs. Same old or another leap to pass the a9II?
 

privatebydesign

Garfield is back...
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,043
3,130
120
Silent shooting was the main reason I bought an R. The 1D series are notoriously noisy. But, if I did a Venn Diagram, the intersection between when I need silent shooting and when I need a 1D style body is about non-existent.
I have two recent situations and a third I have run into where a silent shutter would be optimal, or at the least the sound of the 1 series is obtrusive. Golf and tennis, and weddings in the church, now it could easily be argued you don’t need a 1 series for any of that but they are specific situations I have run in to where my cameras were too loud.
 

tpatana

EOS 5D Mark IV
Nov 1, 2012
1,509
241
I have two recent situations and a third I have run into where a silent shutter would be optimal, or at the least the sound of the 1 series is obtrusive. Golf and tennis, and weddings in the church, now it could easily be argued you don’t need a 1 series for any of that but they are specific situations I have run in to where my cameras were too loud.
One time I only had my 1DX, and I was shooting this Japanese drum performance. They are super loud so no problem. Until there was flute-solo. Wanting at least one frame, I tried to wait for good louder spot and took one picture. Immediately one person from audience started complaining at me about the noise. I said sorry and moved to different spot, although to me it felt her complaining was more noise than that one frame I took.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,368
1,240
The way I take care of my gear the R5 would likely be fine.

Given the 45MP sensor and the advantages mirrorless has, for me, the R5 would be preferred.

Both have solid metal bodies and are weather sealed and I don't have any problem with the smaller ergonomics of the R series. Heck - in that climate I could shoot 8K uninterrupted for hours. :p

I know I'm naive in the sense that I don't shoot professionally, but I don't see the $2500 1DX price premium over an R5 as clearly as I did before the R5 release. The strong points of the 1DX aren't so strong anymore.
Unless they release R1 featuring 20FPS mechanical shutter, 30-40 electronic shutter and 750K -1M actuation expected shutter life. I also thinking of 240Hz EVF refresh Mode option as a possibility.... and then it suddenly becomes attractive :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: neurorx and ERHP

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,707
2,695
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I have two recent situations and a third I have run into where a silent shutter would be optimal, or at the least the sound of the 1 series is obtrusive. Golf and tennis, and weddings in the church, now it could easily be argued you don’t need a 1 series for any of that but they are specific situations I have run in to where my cameras were too loud.
I don't shoot tennis or weddings, but I do shoot golf and yes, a silent shutter would be nice. But the R5 would be more than sufficient for anything I would encounter on the golf course. In fact, I feel like I could probably shoot golf with an R, although I'd rather not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

Bert63

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
772
1,557
Unless they release R1 featuring 20FPS mechanical shutter, 30-40 electronic shutter and 750K -1M actuation expected shutter life. I also thinking of 240Hz EVF refresh Mode option as a possibility.... and then it suddenly becomes attractive :)

As long as they keep the 20MP sensor it won’t attract me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neurorx

privatebydesign

Garfield is back...
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,043
3,130
120
One time I only had my 1DX, and I was shooting this Japanese drum performance. They are super loud so no problem. Until there was flute-solo. Wanting at least one frame, I tried to wait for good louder spot and took one picture. Immediately one person from audience started complaining at me about the noise. I said sorry and moved to different spot, although to me it felt her complaining was more noise than that one frame I took.
Oh, I forgot, yes I have covered several orchestras and been given the kind of access that a silent camera would have been much better for. Again it is difficult to say anybody ‘needs’ a 1 series for that kind of thing but as a generalist using them has served me well enough until now.
 

privatebydesign

Garfield is back...
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,043
3,130
120
I don't shoot tennis or weddings, but I do shoot golf and yes, a silent shutter would be nice. But the R5 would be more than sufficient for anything I would encounter on the golf course. In fact, I feel like I could probably shoot golf with an R, although I'd rather not.
I am looking at transferring from two 1DX II’s to a 1DX III and an R5 as I see them as very complimentary tools that expand my range. On paper I don’t see the R5 disappointing me even coming from a very long run of almost exclusively 1 series models.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

tpatana

EOS 5D Mark IV
Nov 1, 2012
1,509
241
For my sport shooting, the EF 70-200 is basically glued to the 1DX. Very rare to use any other lens. Few days ago I saw the RF 70-200, I was very very surprised how much smaller it was. If/when they come up with R1, I'll be very tempted to get the RF version lens too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

H. Jones

Photojournalist
Aug 1, 2014
404
468
I know it's dangerous to extrapolate from a sample of two, but with the 1 series, small numbers of customers can make a big difference. If your viewpoint is representative of just a small percentage of enthusiasts and mine is representative of a small percentage of professionals, that's still a chunk of potential R1 sales. I would wager that most of the people on this forum drooling over an R1 are not going to buy one. Add to that the shrinking professional market and the disastrous impact of COVID-19 and I agree, I think the business case for an R1 got a lot harder with the release of the R5.

Now, I'm not saying it won't ever happen. Canon has the numbers, not us, but I suspect the camera has dropped several notches on the priority list.
I was considering upgrading my 1DX Mark II to the 1DX Mark III before my R5 arrived, that plan has totally changed though. The R5 has totally changed the way I think about cameras, and I love it. I tried out the 1DX mark III and felt like it was a perfect evolution, but it just feels already like old tech compared to the R5.

That said, there are definitely issues that leave me super, super excited for an R1 to let me ditch my 1DX mark II. For example, flicker reduction on the R5 is limited to 6.5 frames per second. That might not be a big deal to most people, but I'm not going to solely shoot sports at 6.5 frames per second, and even the 10-ish FPS flicker reduction of the 1DX Mark II barely cuts it sometimes. But anyone who shoots night or indoor sports knows that flicker reduction can save you dozens of minutes when filing on a 10-minute deadline and not being able to correct for the terrible colors. It's invaluable. Canon could possibly solve that problem by adding a precise shutter adjustment like on the A9 Mark II, where you can fine tune the shutter speed in fractions of a percentage to match flicker intervals, but I'm not sure they'd add that while knowing how many R1s that feature would sell.

I'm also certain Canon has some big things in store for the R1. If the R5 is shooting 8K raw at 30 fps and getting 45mp at 20 FPS, and the 1DX Mark III can shoot 5.5K raw at 60 FPS, I think Canon is certainly soon going to be able to pull off 50-60 FPS stills at 20 megapixels. I can honestly see that happening in an R1 soon.

The R5 also has a crapton of asterisks on FPS anyway, which is a bit annoying. I would expect that an R1 would be able to do 14-bit files up to 20 FPS and mechanical shutter at either 20 FPS or 16 FPS without restrictions on shooting settings at 16 FPS.

The R5 is a perfect camera for the 5D market, but a lot of professionals had already moved over to the 5D series already. There's a reason the 1-series still exists, and I'm 100% certain Canon knows there is still a large demographic left that only trusts 1-series cameras.

One thing Canon will desperately have to work on for that 1-series trust though is battery life. My R5 managed over 2500 stills before dying while covering a house fire for 3 hours with a 70% charged battery, which I can't complain about, but in comparison I change my 1DX2 battery like once every 2 weeks of shooting. The R5 definitely needs a new battery before almost every assignment for safety, and I've been carrying 3-4 batteries on me to solve that problem, but I'd think the R1 is going to need a lot more battery power than even an LP-E19. A CIPA rating of 220 images in the viewfinder just doesn't give much confidence, even if I personally have worked with the R5 far beyond that and know CIPA is a pain in the butt.

This isn't bashing the R5 at all, I absolutely love mine and it's been kept up to speed with my 1DX2 at breaking news. It definitely makes a far better vacation/portrait/family/wildlife camera than my 1DX Mark II, but there are definite things that keep me holding onto my EF 70-200 and 1DX Mark II even with the new RF 70-200 and R5 in my hands. Once the R1 can replace my 1DX Mark II, I'm down to sell my whole EF glass collection.
 

tpatana

EOS 5D Mark IV
Nov 1, 2012
1,509
241
Wait wut? Is this on manual? Has someone tried actual real life fps with flicker reduction?
This is what the manual says. It doesn't specify how much, just says it may slow down. Could you tell where you got that 6.5 fps? Someone did real life testing?

1597130126703.png
 

koenkooi

EOS R
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,312
1,097
This is what the manual says. It doesn't specify how much, just says it may slow down. Could you tell where you got that 6.5 fps? Someone did real life testing?

View attachment 192082
The manual also doesn't mention the 1/1000s requirement for 20fps, and I know I've seen that in official Canon docs somewhere....
 

Codebunny

EOS R1
Sep 5, 2018
557
521
The manual also doesn't mention the 1/1000s requirement for 20fps, and I know I've seen that in official Canon docs somewhere....
On the 1Dx it had requirements for max fps on widest aperture and shutter speeds over 1/1000. Which is pretty sensible.