The new M1 Max chips from apple should make easy work of it I hope as I’ll be upgrading soon.
Upvote
0
The Canon EOS R1 is coming, here are a few things to expect
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Not sure if this is a popular opinion. I know R1 is gonna be the flagship and aiming at real pros but I would really love if R1 doesn't come with a battery grip by default like the Sony A1. I wouldn't mind much if the body is reasonably bigger than the R5 but a square camera like the R3 is just too big to carry.
Upvote
0
Not sure that's going to be a thing. The battery style of the pro line is not something that's going to fit in just the standard camera body.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Us larger handed folx have no issues. I understand if your mileage may vary
Upvote
0
If it’s less likely to see global shutter development because of faster scan rates how does that affect flash sync speeds going forward? Will they be able to have a flash sync speed with faster readouts? As a portrait photographer that does a lot of mixing ambient daylight and flash, a high flash sync speed (like 1/2,000s +) is the only thing I wish for ) other than ever improved eye AF).
If I could shoot wide open at f1.2 in bright sunlight with flash and not have rely on the compromise of HSS, HS, or ND filters which require large powerful strobes at close working distances to compensate that would be a major game changer and be a huge selling point.
If you could do flash sync at any shutter speed you could totally get by with just the small portable Canon speed lights (which are excellent but I had to sell all 6 of mine and buy big mono lights because of the need for more power when mixing daylight and flash, which speed lights can’t handle. Or you could maximize the full power of those big mono lights rather than just requiring them to compensate for the loss of power, which in effect makes your mono lights drop to about the power of a couple speed lights once you add HSS, HS, or ND filters into the mix.
come on Canon address the flash sync issue already and give us flash sync at any shutter speed (meaning the fastest speeds like 1/8000).
Upvote
0
I think you need to read it again. It says …”but I don’t think we’re going to see the return of $10,000 camera bodies” meaning more than likely it will not cost that much for a flagship camera going forward as that’s not viable anymore.
Upvote
0
I had one of those Sony Mavica mini-cd cameras a long time ago. Interesting camera.
Upvote
0
It's not that I don't have big enough hands to handle it. It's just smaller bodies have more flexibility. A battery grip can always be added to a smaller body if needed but can't say the same in reverse.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Ergonomics is very personal thing. I’ve used Canon battery grips on three different bodies before getting the 1DX. The integrated group is much more comfortable for me. The add-on grips bulge in front and back to accommodate transverse batteries whereas the 1-series bulges only in front. The vibration introduced can also be problematic when on a tripod, but removing and replacing the grip frequently is a PITA.
Upvote
0
If the R1 is really only a year away from release this does make me wonder if I should just keep my R5, rent a R3 when I need a second body and just wait for a R1. I anticipated that the R1 was at least two years away, but if this is correct it will be here sooner rather than later.
Upvote
0
Launching the R1 with mindblowing specs and 50mpix sensor ASAP is the only smart thing to do now…
Please take notice of this (my) point of view:
Canon made the biggest mistake ever to use a 24mpix sensor in their flagship whilst competition is already using 45 or 50mpix. A result of years and years of sleeping R&D department. Canon was top of the list, who could possibly beat them? Best camera’s, best lenses, what could go wrong? No need for mind blowing new development, just some ISO and FPS improvement and pro’s would upgrade their bodies once in every four years.
And then competition (Sony) caused some earthquakes in the camera scene.
That is why they suddenly called this camera the R3 instead of R1 and came up with some BS story about press and sports photographers needing smaller files to transfer. If that was the real case then they would have made an option for shooting Medium Raw (half size) and Full Raw. Believe me, the R3 ís the R1, but Canon got the surprise of their lives when Sony popped up with the A1 with 50mpix and then quickly named it R3.
Just common sense …
Please take notice of this (my) point of view:
Canon made the biggest mistake ever to use a 24mpix sensor in their flagship whilst competition is already using 45 or 50mpix. A result of years and years of sleeping R&D department. Canon was top of the list, who could possibly beat them? Best camera’s, best lenses, what could go wrong? No need for mind blowing new development, just some ISO and FPS improvement and pro’s would upgrade their bodies once in every four years.
And then competition (Sony) caused some earthquakes in the camera scene.
That is why they suddenly called this camera the R3 instead of R1 and came up with some BS story about press and sports photographers needing smaller files to transfer. If that was the real case then they would have made an option for shooting Medium Raw (half size) and Full Raw. Believe me, the R3 ís the R1, but Canon got the surprise of their lives when Sony popped up with the A1 with 50mpix and then quickly named it R3.
Just common sense …
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The shutter and mirror box mechanism represents a substantial chunk of the manufacturing cost of an EOS 1D X Mk III due to the complex mechanical design needed to make all those tiny parts stop and start over and over at an insane rate and to be durable enough to have a reasonable lifespan. Mirrorless already have the mirror box dumped and if the image sensor can perform the functions of the mechanical shutter so it too is eliminated, that significantly reduces the cost to build a beast and frees up a lot of space in the design. High speed shutter mechanisms also consume a lot of the overall power consumption. The day will come where no DSLR camera uses a shutter for exposure but for now it will only be those with state-of-the-art sensors which means no costs of replacing failed shutters that have flapped themselves to oblivion often at the most inconvenient time. Roll on technology.
Upvote
0
"Common sense" when you completely ignore the fact that Canon was the market disruptor in the first place. Canon launched the R5 at 20 fps, 45 megapixels for $2500 less than the A1 came out after the fact. Canon knew what they were doing when they made the R5. And they definitely knew that the R5 was the first shot across the bow of competitors in building high speed, high megapixel cameras.
The R3 was always built to be a response to the $4500 A9 sports camera, not to be an actual flagship camera.
It's like saying that Sony has completely obliterated their own A9 by releasing the A1. That's just not the case whatsoever. There will be an A9 Mark III and it will continue to have a place in their line-up. There is a market for low MP, high FPS, high buffer cameras and will continue to be. Everyone in the market knew that this was the way things were going, and Canon knew that when they released an A1 competitor for 2500 bucks less before Sony even had the chance to announce their version of it.
Upvote
0
Hysterical to even say this when to this day Canon continues to sell the $6500 1DX Mark III brand new to countless people including major organizations.
I've had my 1dx mark II for almost six years now and yet I'll still be selling it for a significant amount once my R3 arrives. But sure. Keep trolling.
Upvote
0
Ok, you’ve got a point here, true.
The thing is, the R5 is not a Flagship camera with inbuilt battery grip and weathersealed body. Neither is the A1, so that’s not an argument. But why is Canon launching small bodies (R5) now that outperform the flagships (1Dx) ???
Upvote
0
Similar threads
