The Canon EOS R1 is coming, here are a few things to expect

john1970

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
431
517
Northeastern US
Just wanted to say thank to everyone that answered my question. I concur that hardware changes would be difficult at this stage and we are likely only looking at firmware changes. I suspect that a year prior to release that a beta product is already being test internally at Canon.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,049
4,613
Just wanted to say thank to everyone that answered my question. I concur that hardware changes would be difficult at this stage and we are likely only looking at firmware changes. I suspect that a year prior to release that a beta product is already being test internally at Canon.
Or the release is further out than a year.
 

tiggy@mac.com

R5
CR Pro
Jan 20, 2014
719
609
Thetford, VT
www.camnostic.com
I wonder why the 400 mm DO f4 + EF 2x III extender is not as good as the 500 mm f4 + EF2x III extender?

I compared these two directly against each other a few years ago when deciding between precisely those lenses. I went with the 500mm f/4 mostly because I got a really good deal on a used one. The 400 DO II was newer and not as discounted among the used inventory at the time.

The image quality results showed me that the 500 was very slightly better with the TCs, particularly in the bokeh quality (so, you known, hair splitting). But if I'd had gotten a better offer on a used 400 f/4 DO II, I'd have probably taken it. I really liked the size better.

In retrospect, now shooting the 600 f/4 II primarily, the 500 was the better decision from a focal length perspective, but the IQ issue is still pretty even.
 

tiggy@mac.com

R5
CR Pro
Jan 20, 2014
719
609
Thetford, VT
www.camnostic.com
Or the release is further out than a year.
Ayup.

It's seldom that we're handed a rumor about a new camera coming out a year later, which turns out to be more than notionally accurate on timing. Sometimes it's accurate that such a model will eventually exist, but the average difference in first rumor timing to actual release is probably more than a year off.

In the mirrorless era, this is probably an average of 1.5 years off. In retrospect, we keep finding that Canon's actual release schedule continues to conform to their 4ish-year cycles, depending on the model class.
 

john1970

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
431
517
Northeastern US
Ayup.

It's seldom that we're handed a rumor about a new camera coming out a year later, which turns out to be more than notionally accurate on timing. Sometimes it's accurate that such a model will eventually exist, but the average difference in first rumor timing to actual release is probably more than a year off.

In the mirrorless era, this is probably an average of 1.5 years off. In retrospect, we keep finding that Canon's actual release schedule continues to conform to their 4ish-year cycles, depending on the model class.
I agree. Back in the film day there was a 16 month separation between the EOS 3 and the EOS-1v; that could be what we have here as well. In reality, I would like to see Canon go well beyond the Z9 and A1 with the R1 and if they take the time they definitely can.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,843
12,088
I just realized that I kind of have a 800mm f/8 lens in the form of a 400mm DO 4L II and EF 2XIII and EOS EF-R converter.
The quality seems OK but not as good as the quality of the 500mm 4L IS II EF 2XIII combo.
I've had two 400mm DO II, and neither could be described as better than your "OK" with the 2xTCII. In fact, the two RF 800mm f/11 I've handled are at least as good as them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tron

Bob Howland

EOS RP
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2012
654
244
Just wanted to say thank to everyone that answered my question. I concur that hardware changes would be difficult at this stage and we are likely only looking at firmware changes. I suspect that a year prior to release that a beta product is already being test internally at Canon.
How long have R3 testers had those cameras? The R3 feedback may have already occurred over the last 6 months. If the actual R1 introduction is a year away, Canon would likely have units in testers' hands for the previous 3+ months.
 

john1970

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
431
517
Northeastern US
How long have R3 testers had those cameras? The R3 feedback may have already occurred over the last 6 months. If the actual R1 introduction is a year away, Canon would likely have units in testers' hands for the previous 3+ months.
Fair point. I also wondered if feedback is from the CPS members that test the cameras 3 months prior to launch so that gives a bit more than a year.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,470
2,336
Is it honestly necessary to punctuate every sentence with “IMHO” or to state “this is what I want but YMMV” on a forum that deals mostly with rumours and rarely with facts?
No, it's not.

But when someone (not you) starts sentences with "we want" or "give us" instead of "I want" they're trying to speak for many, and I will (figuratively) stomp on them for it.

When they try to imply that if Canon doesn't give "us" what "we" want they're "d-word-ed," and will lose market share, they are again trying to speak for everyone, and need to be brought up short.

In other words, DON'T presume to speak for ME in telling Canon what they should do.

An "I'd like to see" or "I want" would be all that's necessary...no need for a "YMMV," that would be implicit. It wouldn't be punctuation, just a shift in the sentence subject from a "we" those people aren't entitled to, to an "I".
 

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,984
1,344
OK I want R R5 to not miss any capabilities that 7DII, 5DIV and 5DsR have like:

1. To have a single button memory recall where many settings are temporarily activated (including speed, focusing methods, exp comp, AF parameters, etc). So I can shoot static birds with lower speed and the central AF point but when I detect a flying bird I press the button and the camera speed get up to say 1/2500, the AF points change to a lot more than the central, etc, etc.
As I mentioned I can/could do it with 7DII, 5DIV and 5DsR.

2. To configure camera for release, focus or in between priority just like all latest Canon DSLRs (and R).
 

juststeve

EOS M6 Mark II
Nov 29, 2018
73
108
Perhaps of interest to those wanting light weight, compact and less expensive super-teles for birding, Nikon has two compact lenses on the Z system map for 2022. One looks to be a 400/ 4.5 to 4.8 and the other an 800/6.3 to 6.8 of maybe 7.1. It is assumed they are the successors to the F mount 300/4 and 500/5.6 PF lenses which were/are quite highly regarded optically, quite light and compact and while expensive, not ridiculously so.

The 300/4 I have a wee bit of experience with as one of my tour people was using on a D500. It was a sweet lens, very compact and very good optically and price is about $1500. The 500/5.6 has not been in my hands but a lot has been posted on FM about the lens. The only unfavorable comments I have seen about the lens regard availability. Price was about $3300, I believe. It is not in production now, as of a couple of months.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,843
12,088
OK I want R R5 to not miss any capabilities that 7DII, 5DIV and 5DsR have like:

1. To have a single button memory recall where many settings are temporarily activated (including speed, focusing methods, exp comp, AF parameters, etc). So I can shoot static birds with lower speed and the central AF point but when I detect a flying bird I press the button and the camera speed get up to say 1/2500, the AF points change to a lot more than the central, etc, etc.
As I mentioned I can/could do it with 7DII, 5DIV and 5DsR.

2. To configure camera for release, focus or in between priority just like all latest Canon DSLRs (and R).
I used to do the first with the old fashioned physical mode dial, using muscle memory to flick within milliseconds. It's more complicated with the modern electronic mode dial. I find it easy to switch shutter speeds manually in Fv with the dial left on shutter speed. If I underexpose by not increasing the iso as I increase speed, I just correct in post as the R5 can be pushed through so many ev.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EricN

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,400
4,029
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
But when someone (not you) starts sentences with "we want" or "give us" instead of "I want" they're trying to speak for many, and I will (figuratively) stomp on them for it...
I would add that asserting that Canon (or any other company) "can" do something like offering a lens at a low price point set by the person doing the commenting, will also prompt negative comments. It gets amplified if the person doubles down on their original assertion after others have pointed out they aren't being realistic.

In this particular case, several people pointed out the targeted price point was unrealistic and why, but instead of acknowledging that and moving on or asking questions, he just dug in and basically said not to confuse him with the facts.

I've found that on this forum it's the doubling down on original misconceptions that usually gets people in trouble with other forum participants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,984
1,344
I used to do the first with the old fashioned physical mode dial, using muscle memory to flick within milliseconds. It's more complicated with the modern electronic mode dial. I find it easy to switch shutter speeds manually in Fv with the dial left on shutter speed. If I underexpose by not increasing the iso as I increase speed, I just correct in post as the R5 can be pushed through so many ev.
I tend to use high speed to cover for all cases but unfortunately sometimes I lower the speed and I increase it afterwards. But I have made the same mistake with 5DsR when I was shooting a static and an almost static bid.

The static one was in a dark place so I had shot it with 400mm DO II at 1/160 but then I forgot to change the speed. So I shot a tree-creeper at that speed. Some shots were a disaster but fortunately some turned out good (and at low iso too).
 

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
440
477
UK
No, it's not.

But when someone (not you) starts sentences with "we want" or "give us" instead of "I want" they're trying to speak for many, and I will (figuratively) stomp on them for it.

When they try to imply that if Canon doesn't give "us" what "we" want they're "d-word-ed," and will lose market share, they are again trying to speak for everyone, and need to be brought up short.

In other words, DON'T presume to speak for ME in telling Canon what they should do.

An "I'd like to see" or "I want" would be all that's necessary...no need for a "YMMV," that would be implicit. It wouldn't be punctuation, just a shift in the sentence subject from a "we" those people aren't entitled to, to an "I".
Hence I nearly always qualify my posts to make it clear that I’m talking about my own opinions and suggestions. If I suggest that “many” or “most” people probably think likewise, I think it’s pretty obvious that I’m expressing an opinion. I sometimes make the mistake of assuming that people have enough common sense to *realise* that I’m expressing an opinion, without needing to double-underline it. :rolleyes:

I’ll be off to Africa tomorrow, so I hope everyone here enjoys their photography, and some interesting and amicable discussions during my absence. :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: maulanawale

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,049
4,613
I think it’s pretty obvious that I’m expressing an opinion. I sometimes make the mistake of assuming that people have enough common sense to *realise* that I’m expressing an opinion, without needing to double-underline it. :rolleyes:
Yes, it’s obvious you’re expressing an opinion.

Hopefully when people express an opinion they have enough common sense to *realize* that their opinion might be challenged… particularly in cases where objective evidence refutes their opinion.

Furthermore, if someone were to express an opinion that differed significantly from objective reality, for example posting that the earth is flat, that person might reasonably expect to be challenged rather forcefully.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,843
12,088
No, it's not.

But when someone (not you) starts sentences with "we want" or "give us" instead of "I want" they're trying to speak for many, and I will (figuratively) stomp on them for it.

When they try to imply that if Canon doesn't give "us" what "we" want they're "d-word-ed," and will lose market share, they are again trying to speak for everyone, and need to be brought up short.

In other words, DON'T presume to speak for ME in telling Canon what they should do.

An "I'd like to see" or "I want" would be all that's necessary...no need for a "YMMV," that would be implicit. It wouldn't be punctuation, just a shift in the sentence subject from a "we" those people aren't entitled to, to an "I".
Perhaps he's King Entoman and it's the "Royal We" as used by our Queen.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,843
12,088
Yes, it’s obvious you’re expressing an opinion.

Hopefully when people expresses an opinion they have enough common sense to *realize* that their opinion might be challenged… particularly in cases where objective evidence refutes their opinion.

Furthermore, if someone were to express an opinion that differed significantly from objective reality, for example posting that the earth is flat, that person might reasonably expect to be challenged rather forcefully.
Yes, it's fair to have opinions on matters that are just matters of opinion, but not on matters of fact. I have mentioned before that the Headmaster (Principal) of my school subjected us to a lecture by a spokesman of the Flat Earth Society. He was quite convincing.
 

Hector1970

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,354
609
I compared these two directly against each other a few years ago when deciding between precisely those lenses. I went with the 500mm f/4 mostly because I got a really good deal on a used one. The 400 DO II was newer and not as discounted among the used inventory at the time.

The image quality results showed me that the 500 was very slightly better with the TCs, particularly in the bokeh quality (so, you known, hair splitting). But if I'd had gotten a better offer on a used 400 f/4 DO II, I'd have probably taken it. I really liked the size better.

In retrospect, now shooting the 600 f/4 II primarily, the 500 was the better decision from a focal length perspective, but the IQ issue is still pretty even.
I don’t know but I suspect the 2x was designed most closely to work with 400 2.8 , 500 & 600 F4. I never liked it with say the 70-200 or 300 F2.8 but it works really well with the 600 F4 II. The 1.4 works well with everything and I often leave it on the 300 2.8 II . Of all my lens I rate the 300 2.8 II the best. It makes everything look good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kaihp