The Canon Ambush

[Jack Douglas]

This has come up on occasion rather vaguely but I thought it would be fun to reflect/analyze what we are seeing as Canon presses forward with their camera and lens development.

Canon has been bashed and ridiculed sometimes relentlessly by the armchair quarterbacks and the reviewers - one in particular comes to mind and all the while they have had a game plan - an ambush.

They changed the mount - everyone gripes ... and now ...

And they have positioned themselves so that when they did have all the pieces in place (and especially the higher speed card and the communication network and computation capability) they could really put out a product that would make folk stand up and take notice.

My record is clear, through all the bashing I have stood firmly behind my choice to move to Canon and now it looks like it'll be paying off.

Jack

 

[rbielefeld]

I preordered the R5 and the 100-500. It may pay off as you state. But, there are still unanswered questions for me that may make the R5 a not so good choice for me. I don't rely on reviews from others as we all shoot differently and have different needs to some extent, so I withhold judgment until I can use the camera and lenses how I need to use them. The two main issues that may be problems for me 1) rolling shutter on fast moving birds in flight and 2) overheating when shooting 8K and 4K video. I really hope the R5 does not have these issues or they are minimal. I have shot Canon for over 30 years and I now shoot Sony and Canon. The Sony a9II shoots 20 fps electronic shutter with no rolling shutter issues at all. Even on the fastest subjects I will ever shoot. I can shoot 4K 30 with no ssues on my Sony cameras. Albeit with without a log format, which I do not like. So, now I want a Canon mirrorless body that can do the same and best the Sony in IS (Sony's SteadyShot is not nearly as good as Canon IS IMO) and ergonomics. I don't like Sony's feel in my hands and I don't like their menu system among other things. I want to go back to shooting Canon exclusively. I hope the R5 gets me there along with the R1, which I hope is coming in the near future.

 

[Sharlin]

The Sony a9II shoots 20 fps electronic shutter with no rolling shutter issues at all.

Well, you can't expect the R5 to be an a9 killer. The a9ii sensor is unique, and clearly an eventual "R1" should be at least as fast. But expecting the same from the R5 would be just unfair. Anyway, the R5 has a 12fps mechanical shutter, remember? Given that its direct DSLR predecessor had just 7fps, at a lower resolution, and its closest competitors don't reach 12fps either, I really don't see any reason to complain.

 

[ethanz]

The real question is then Jack, which one are you going to get suckered into buying?

 

[Jack Douglas]

The real question is then Jack, which one are you going to get suckered into buying?

I plan to buy the R5 ... unless for some strange reason it seems compelling to continue to wait for an R1. Either way it's hard for me to justify such spending on camera gear and that's why I have cars I've collected getting sold. However, it seems that the 1 series is probably stuck in the lower MP region and that doesn't cut it for me.

How about you?

Jack

 

[dcm]

I plan to buy the R5 ... unless for some strange reason it seems compelling to continue to wait for an R1. Either way it's hard for me to justify such spending on camera gear and that's why I have cars I've collected getting sold. However, it seems that the 1 series is probably stuck in the lower MP region and that doesn't cut it for me.

How about you?

Jack

Another 1DXII user considering an R5 for the similar reasons. Had the 1DXII/6D combination for a while. Was waiting for a new 5DS. The R5 looks to be a good fit for my needs. Have the funds, just not the time or opportunities to shoot for the near future so I’m in no hurry. Between COVID and work It looks like I’ll have time to see what the R1 brings to the table to see if I really want to upgrade my 1DXII or just complement it with the R5 next summer. I’m leaning towards the R5. Can’t see getting a R6 with the same size sensor either.

More than enough EF L glass to cover my needs for now so no rush for RF glass. The 800 f/11 might be my first RF lens since I do shoot the 100-400L II with extenders. Too bad it won’t mount on my M6m2 (I’d have ordered it already). I was considering the 400 f/4L DO but I might put that off for a while.

Can’t wait to see what Canon tempts me with next in the M series.

 

[Maximilian]

... and all the while they have had a game plan - an ambush.
...

I wouldn't call this an ambush. And only insiders know how they have planned their strategy.

To me it looks like they probably have missed the starting gun ind first. But they woke up, realized the risks and potentials and instead of getting into a hurry and then mess it all up they took their time, they started a "teaser" with the R, looking if their concept works and then in 2020 they made their "big bang".
A little bit slow, but therefore better.
And surely some tech nerds and testchart geeks will find the flaws they are looking for, but hey... again it's THE SYSTEM!

Okay, Sony is already there: Good bodies, good lenses. But how long did they need? And they went there in a hurry and sometimes faulty way.
But Nikon? They did a more offensive start in first, maybe the better, maybe not.
But Canon now has overtaken them like F1 overtakes a jogger. Nikon will have to strike back.
Looking over at n*****rumors.com they seem to be in some kind of paralyzed. Didn't find one thread about what happend at Canon the last few days.
I hope Nikon is not going the Olympus way.

 

[Kit.]

It's not an ambush. It's an Old Bull, Young Bull tale.

 

[rbielefeld]

Well, you can't expect the R5 to be an a9 killer. The a9ii sensor is unique, and clearly an eventual "R1" should be at least as fast. But expecting the same from the R5 would be just unfair. Anyway, the R5 has a 12fps mechanical shutter, remember? Given that its direct DSLR predecessor had just 7fps, at a lower resolution, and its closest competitors don't reach 12fps either, I really don't see any reason to complain.

I am not sure I should not expect it to be an a9 or a9II killer. It costs almost as much and an R1 will likely cost about 2K more than what I paid for my a9II. The R5 can shoot 20 fps, so Canon was definitely aiming in the direction of Sony's a9II when they designed the R5. Anyway, I am not talking about fps speed so much. I am talking about rolling shutter affects. The R5 will shoot 20 fps electronic shutter just like the a9II. Why can't I expect no rolling shutter issues like the a9 and now the a9II. I need to be able to photograph fast moving birds in flight without rolling shutter making the birds look distorted. If you design a camera that can shoot 20 fps, as Canon now has, you are branding it as an action camera. Given it is an action camera and provides a 20 fps electronic shutter then it should be able to shoot action without rolling shutter issues. If it can't what good is it really? I don't need 20 fps for static subjects I need it to capture every moment possible during fast action sequences. I love Canon cameras and I want them to give me the tool I need so I can stay with them. Given it is 2020 going on 2021 and another manufacturer has had such a camera body available since May 2017, I want these new Canon cameras to have the same capabilities. I have an R5 on preorder and I am so hoping it will be awesome and provide stellar fast action at 20 fps without or with minimal rolling shutter.

 

[Kit.]

Why can't I expect no rolling shutter issues like the a9 and now the a9II.

Because 45 dual megapixels are not 24 megapixels?

 

[rbielefeld]

Because 45 dual megapixels are not 24 megapixels?

Obviously true, but if Canon could not deliver rolling shutter affect free action images at 20 fps at 45 megapixels then maybe they should have kept the megapixels lower. 20 fps is made for fast action and thus I have a hard time understanding building an action camera that can shoot 20 fps and not deliver rolling shutter affect free images of fast moving subjects when that is the scenario where the 20 fps really shines. Anyway this is all speculation until we get the R5 in our hands and create some images. Again, I really hope this camera works for me.

 

[koenkooi]

Obviously true, but if Canon could not deliver rolling shutter affect free action images at 20 fps at 45 megapixels then maybe they should have kept the megapixels lower. 20 fps is made for fast action and thus I have a hard time understanding building an action camera that can shoot 20 fps and not deliver rolling shutter affect free images of fast moving subjects when that is the scenario where the 20 fps really shines. Anyway this is all speculation until we get the R5 in our hands and create some images. Again, I really hope this camera works for me.

Apart from global shutter cameras, no camera offers "rolling shutter free action images". The A9II has a short sensor readout time (1/160s acording to the interwebs), but it isn't zero.
You have to decide what amount of rolling shutter is acceptable for you, or invest in a global shutter camera.

 

[Kit.]

Obviously true, but if Canon could not deliver rolling shutter affect free action images at 20 fps at 45 megapixels then maybe they should have kept the megapixels lower.

How about no?

20 fps is nice to have, but for a camera I would like to use for the next 10 years, I would prefer 45 megapixels.

Besides, rolling shutter is much less of an issue if your subject moves with a constant speed and your background is blurry anyway.

 

[Sharlin]

Obviously true, but if Canon could not deliver rolling shutter affect free action images at 20 fps at 45 megapixels then maybe they should have kept the megapixels lower. 20 fps is made for fast action and thus I have a hard time understanding building an action camera that can shoot 20 fps and not deliver rolling shutter affect free images of fast moving subjects when that is the scenario where the 20 fps really shines.

Maybe the R6 is for you then? I mean, if the R5 hardware can do 20fps why artificially limit the camera, even if rolling shutter made some use cases less than perfect? AFAIK the 1DX3 has very well controlled rolling shutter, although not at a9ii level, so the R6 should have similar performance. I doubt the R5 will be bad, either. With modern cameras rolling shutter is mostly a problem in flickering artificial light, anyway.

 

[AlanF]

I am not sure I should not expect it to be an a9 or a9II killer. It costs almost as much and an R1 will likely cost about 2K more than what I paid for my a9II. The R5 can shoot 20 fps, so Canon was definitely aiming in the direction of Sony's a9II when they designed the R5. Anyway, I am not talking about fps speed so much. I am talking about rolling shutter affects. The R5 will shoot 20 fps electronic shutter just like the a9II. Why can't I expect no rolling shutter issues like the a9 and now the a9II. I need to be able to photograph fast moving birds in flight without rolling shutter making the birds look distorted. If you design a camera that can shoot 20 fps, as Canon now has, you are branding it as an action camera. Given it is an action camera and provides a 20 fps electronic shutter then it should be able to shoot action without rolling shutter issues. If it can't what good is it really? I don't need 20 fps for static subjects I need it to capture every moment possible during fast action sequences. I love Canon cameras and I want them to give me the tool I need so I can stay with them. Given it is 2020 going on 2021 and another manufacturer has had such a camera body available since May 2017, I want these new Canon cameras to have the same capabilities. I have an R5 on preorder and I am so hoping it will be awesome and provide stellar fast action at 20 fps without or with minimal rolling shutter.View attachment 191276View attachment 191277View attachment 191278

Great shots. I see from the EXIFs you used the Sony FE 200-600mm. It's a great pity that Canon has priced the 100-500mm so much higher than it. We'll have to wait and see if the R5 is competitive. I'll wait til Jack checks it out to see whether it's an ambush or Custer's last stand.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Obviously true, but if Canon could not deliver rolling shutter affect free action images at 20 fps at 45 megapixels then maybe they should have kept the megapixels lower. 20 fps is made for fast action and thus I have a hard time understanding building an action camera that can shoot 20 fps and not deliver rolling shutter affect free images of fast moving subjects when that is the scenario where the 20 fps really shines. Anyway this is all speculation until we get the R5 in our hands and create some images. Again, I really hope this camera works for me.

We never get away from compromises based on physics.

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

Great shots. I see from the EXIFs you used the Sony FE 200-600mm. It's a great pity that Canon has priced the 100-500mm so much higher than it. We'll have to wait and see if the R5 is competitive. I'll wait til Jack checks it out to see whether it's an ambush or Custer's last stand.

The wait may be rather long given that I still don't have many complaints about the 400 DO II and my 2X results. However, age will certainly impact what I'm willing to carry sooner than later and I suspect I'm on the same trajectory as you. Not to mention that I may not get the same AF results/speed at X2 with the R5. Like others I see the specs and it's for me but how will it actually perform.

Thinking about the intent of why I started the thread; it's fairly obvious what a game changer the CFexp card is and so others will be catching up to Canon fairly soon in that regard. Should I or anyone complain about the expense of the card? It's largely the reason we have what we have and we should be thinking that way when purchasing the cards. Also, think how Canon chose to increase the mount size and improve the communication and how that generated angry comments and now look at what the results are/will be and think of Sony's situation in that respect.

Jack

 

[Maximilian]

... I need to be able to photograph fast moving birds in flight without rolling shutter making the birds look distorted. ...

Great pics rbielefeld . Shot with an a9 or what gear?
I would be interested in the whole data. If not here then please PM to me. Thanks in advance.

Edit: Didn't recognize the exifs were available. But maybe tell the story behind it. Thanks.

 

[AlanF]

The wait may be rather long given that I still don't have many complaints about the 400 DO II and my 2X results. However, age will certainly impact what I'm willing to carry sooner than later and I suspect I'm on the same trajectory as you. Not to mention that I may not get the same AF results/speed at X2 with the R5. Like others I see the specs and it's for me but how will it actually perform.

Thinking about the intent of why I started the thread; it's fairly obvious what a game changer the CFexp card is and so others will be catching up to Canon fairly soon in that regard. Should I or anyone complain about the expense of the card? It's largely the reason we have what we have and we should be thinking that way when purchasing the cards. Also, think how Canon chose to increase the mount size and improve the communication and how that generated angry comments and now look at what the results are/will be and think of Sony's situation in that respect.

Jack

The RF is the same mount size as the EF, it's just a shorter flange-sensor distance. CFExpress is essentially the next generation of XQD, which Sony and Nikon have been using for several years, and a simple software patch made the CFExpress backward compatible for the Nikon Z6 and Z7. It's Canon catching up with the competition, not the other way round.

 

[Jack Douglas]

The RF is the same mount size as the EF, it's just a shorter flange-sensor distance. CFExpress is essentially the next generation of XQD, which Sony and Nikon have been using for several years, and a simple software patch made the CFExpress backward compatible for the Nikon Z6 and Z7. It's Canon catching up with the competition, not the other way round.

I guess I got confused with the fact that Sony has a smaller mount.

So in other words it's mostly Canonites who are impressed/excited about this camera? I never thought of that given that I've never considered switching back to Nikon or moving to Sony and haven't experienced what Artie and the rest have. Never the less, I'm a happy camper because the R5 seems to tick most of the boxes and a 100-500, if its IQ/AF is great, would be very handy along with the 45 MP. Certainly catch up is a valid term relative to many items.

Jack