Why not the R5? Its higher Resolution offers way more options to crop in later.The R6 interests me a lot for weddings.
Or do you expect a better Noise performance from the R6 since it got a lower resolution?
Upvote
0
Why not the R5? Its higher Resolution offers way more options to crop in later.The R6 interests me a lot for weddings.
People don't understand frame grabs. You still have to shoot at a shutter speed appropriate for stopping action, which is not the same shutter speed as you would use for video. Shooting at 1/60 sec (normal video) or even at 1/250 sec (for slo-mo) is only going to get you thousands of blurred images. You can shoot at 1/1000 second, but then the video will look like crap. The key to smooth video is to blur the action from one frame to the next, hardly conducive to frame grabs.
Looks like diagonals are swapped.6720x4480, diagonal is 4406 "px"; Canon EOS R 4k: 3840x2160; diagonal 8076 "px".
Could someone who does video explain why a user would want 8K video.
What would they use it for and who would view it at 8K?
Since I can barely visually detect the improvement of 4K over HD, is it easy to see the difference between 4K and 8K?
Seeing as most video seems to be consumed on phones would you notice 8k over HD on a phone?
Does anyone commercially ask for 8K over 4K or HD? Is it common?
I'm surprised its such a big selling point, is it something that users desire but won't really use?
I wonder if Canon decided to make a development announcement for the R5, in order to head off the complaints about a 20mp sensor when they announce the R6.
"This is the camera we are going to release but you have to wait until summer. In the meantime, watch for another announcement in May."
I prefer dynamic range alsoI have a 5DsR and would like more megapixels than have more fps. I'm not interested in the video at all. Another stop of DR would be nice, but, I still manage to get good photos without it. That's just me.
Don't forget you still have all the EF glassReally curious about the ergonomics of these new bodies and how quickly Canon introduced native macro lenses for the RF.
Why not the R5? Its higher Resolution offers way more options to crop in later.
Or do you expect a better Noise performance from the R6 since it got a lower resolution?
Yes and the macros will all work fine, but a 100mm prime / macro is a really standard lens, and it 'must' come in the RF mount sooner rather than later. I'm very conflicted about whether to wait for a Canon RF version rather than buying an EF to adapt.Don't forget you still have all the EF glass
Don't forget the Osborne effect though.Fervent anticipation is a great marketing tool.
I wasn't familiar with this term, but yes, this is along the lines of what I was thinking. Make a development announcement about the R5, but selectively leak that a second camera is coming first, the R6. Some people will wait for the R5, but others may go for the R6, which apparently will be available sooner. Customers can compare the actual specs of the R6 once it is announced, to the presumed specs of the coming R5 and decide which they'd rather have. Especially since the R5 is supposed to be released a month after the R6.Don't forget the Osborne effect though.
Canon has been behind tech wise with their bodies and has been trying to stop defections
The R was rushed.
These new cameras are being leaked to keep canon customers on the fence within the fold
hopefully they deliver this year
I disagree with these statements. There really isn't anything to substantiate that Canon "has been behind tech wise." There are differences between manufacturers, but Canon is not "behind" in any significant way.
People keep saying the R was rushed or somehow incomplete. But, that assessment usually comes from people who don't use the camera.
In order to keep Canon customers within the fold, there would have to be some indication that customers are "on the fence." Looking at the sales figures that are available, it doesn't appear that Canon has been having any problem with customers moving to another brand.
Canon has acknowledged that their entrance into the mirrorless market was late, but a late entrance does not equate with an inferior entrance. Canon has some catching up to do to solidify its market share, but that will be accomplished with a broader range of products and aggressive marketing.
I agree with you. Strange thing is this: I own an R and it doesn't feel rushed to me at all. It's a great camera for portraiture which is what, I think, the initial lenses were more aimed at, to include the 28-70. People say it was rushed, but I have to disagree with them. For my uses, it is a great camera and a very worthy upgrade from the 5D Mark III. I am thrilled with it. I'm also thrilled with the glass. So in my case, Canon did a great job. Was it rushed in the firmware sense? Maybe. People tend to love it or hate it. I am much happier with it than I would have been with a 5D Mark IV. The R5 will be a great camera, but far more camera than I need.I disagree with these statements. There really isn't anything to substantiate that Canon "has been behind tech wise." There are differences between manufacturers, but Canon is not "behind" in any significant way.
People keep saying the R was rushed or somehow incomplete. But, that assessment usually comes from people who don't use the camera.
In order to keep Canon customers within the fold, there would have to be some indication that customers are "on the fence." Looking at the sales figures that are available, it doesn't appear that Canon has been having any problem with customers moving to another brand.
Canon has acknowledged that their entrance into the mirrorless market was late, but a late entrance does not equate with an inferior entrance. Canon has some catching up to do to solidify its market share, but that will be accomplished with a broader range of products and aggressive marketing.
Consider them hype.The question I ask myself is what is considered the more video centric camera between the R5 and R6 cameras? Looking at the specs it should be the R5 but mybe the video functions like the 8k or the 4k120 will have major crop, and on the opposite the low megapixel and specs of the R6 make it a mini 1dX MkIII? I really don't know how to consider either of thes rumored cameras in the Canon lineup.
Still waiting to see that 5DV...
I think R5 is 5D equivalent.I'm gonna keep banging this drum until we know more, but don't be fooled by the "R6" designation yet. We don't know it has anything to do with the 6D line of cameras.
The R did not introduce any new technology, apart from the RF mount of course. And that does not make it rushed, or bad or keep it from being the awesome camera it is.People keep saying the R was rushed or somehow incomplete. But, that assessment usually comes from people who don't use the camera.