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

[tron]

To amplify this, I very much doubt the cost of a lens scales linearly with the area of the front element (which is what a "stop" of aperture correlates to). It probably goes up a great deal faster than that.

Exactly what I was saying to entoman. Even with no "fancy" L-glass, etc, I would estimate $4K. And for that amount of money we would want L quality so there is the $6K estimate.

 

[dtaylor]

Honest question, when does it all stop? That what you have gives you the pictures you want? Is there ever satisfaction?

The 5Ds, and the lenses I purchased around the same time (kit overhaul), has all but killed GAS for me. It just works, and I can saturate my largest prints with detail. I'm interested in the new stuff that's coming out, but I do not feel a need to save up and buy it.

I'm sure that will change with something. Perhaps with an even higher resolution body, or with some RF lens Canon releases. There are a couple more EF lenses I want, but otherwise I just wish I had the time/money to travel more and really use my current kit.

 

[entoman]

Using that logic, an 800mm f8 should be about half the cost of an 800 f5.6 or $6,500.

The 800mm F5.6 is a highly corrected professional L series lens, ultra-durable, weather-sealed and with substantial AF motors as well as far more complex optics and a full range of apertures. It also is supplied with a rotating tripod foot, a lens hood, and a flight case, all of which adds considerably to the cost.

My suggested 800mm F8 would as I’ve already explained, be a simple, fixed aperture lens, built to the same modest standard as the 800mm F11, i.e. cheaper materials all round, no weather sealing, no iris mechanism, less complex electronics, much weaker AF motor, no rotating tripod foot, no lens hood and no case.

I don’t for one second accept that Canon couldn’t produce and sell such a lens for twice the cost of the similarly constructed 800mm F11, but it’s entirely academic as they undoubtedly have greater priorities for forthcoming RF lenses.

 

[unfocused]

The 800mm F5.6 is a highly corrected professional L series lens, ultra-durable, weather-sealed and with substantial AF motors as well as far more complex optics and a full range of apertures. It also is supplied with a rotating tripod foot, a lens hood, and a flight case, all of which adds considerably to the cost.

My suggested 800mm F8 would as I’ve already explained, be a simple, fixed aperture lens, built to the same modest standard as the 800mm F11, i.e. cheaper materials all round, no weather sealing, no iris mechanism, less complex electronics, much weaker AF motor, no rotating tripod foot, no lens hood and no case.

I don’t for one second accept that Canon couldn’t produce and sell such a lens for twice the cost of the similarly constructed 800mm F11, but it’s entirely academic as they undoubtedly have greater priorities for forthcoming RF lenses.

Two data points. One you like so you are keeping it. One you don't like, so you are excluding it.

Your response seems to fall into the "don't confuse me with the facts" category. We can all speculate about a lens we would like to have and then pick an arbitrary price point for our dream lens. Unfortunately, Canon has to deal with reality not wishful thinking.

 

[BBarn]

Nothing like some serious competition to shift a company's marketing. Essentially nothing specific reported about the R1 until the Z1 announcement. Now the trickle of information begins. Look for Canon to be the one dribbling out information over the next year in hopes of stemming a shift in sales. A $5500 Z1 could also mean some pricing adjustments are on the horizon.

 

[Hector1970]

The 5Ds, and the lenses I purchased around the same time (kit overhaul), has all but killed GAS for me. It just works, and I can saturate my largest prints with detail. I'm interested in the new stuff that's coming out, but I do not feel a need to save up and buy it.

I'm sure that will change with something. Perhaps with an even higher resolution body, or with some RF lens Canon releases. There are a couple more EF lenses I want, but otherwise I just wish I had the time/money to travel more and really use my current kit.

Honest question, when does it all stop? That what you have gives you the pictures you want? Is there ever satisfaction?

We must be getting closer to the limit. FPS - diminishing return.
What difference would 60FPS make over 30FPS except more headaches sorting through images.
45MP - I'm sure I'd take 100MP but also a diminishing return.
ISO performance - one of the great improvements in the last 10 years but must be coming to a ceiling.
Focussing I would think is one area that could be improved upon, it could be more intelligent and precise but its pretty good already.
The R5 , Sony A1 and the Nikon Z9 are getting pretty close to everything anyone would need.
The R1 might just take the biscuit.

 

[styoda]

Wonder if it will the the R2 ?

 

[entoman]

Everyone's threshold is different of course! What's wrong is to promulgate it as a general truth. It's like the old narrative about the 5Ds/R that they're "unusable at high ISO" which a lot of people still believe despite clear evidence that they were no worse than lower res sensors of the same generation normalised. When someone claims "X is unusable" without caveats I have to chime in when my experience has been different.

You've admitted to being a pixel peeper and that's your prerogative, but telling people a given lens (in this case) can only be used in certain circumstances is misleading, when most people view photographs as a whole image, and don't pixel peep.

Almost everything that is said on this and other forums, either by myself or by others, is *opinion*, and the suggestions that I and most others make are mostly about what we *personally* would like to see happen.

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?

Some suggestions or opinions will be more popular than others, and I like to think that there’s a possibility that some of the more popular ones get fed back to manufacturers by the reviewers who pick up on internet feedback.

If none of us make suggestions, or point out perceived or actual flaws, how are the manufacturers going to become aware of our needs or desires?

As for my suggestion for a 800mm F8, I’m clearly outvoted on that subject, which is absolutely fine. I don’t come here to win wars, just to express opinions or offer suggestions.

 

[tron]

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.

 

[john1970]

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 wonder why the 400 mm DO f4 + EF 2x III extender is not as good as the 500 mm f4 + EF2x III extender?

 

[john1970]

I have a question. According to the rumors, it mentions that Canon is waiting on feedback from the R3 to finalize the specifications on the R1.

If this statement is true, how realistic is it that Canon can roll out a R1 camera in Q4 2022 while incorporating feedback from the R3 camera that was only released a year earlier especially if the updates required hardware changes?

 

[unfocused]

I have a question. According to the rumors, it mentions that Canon is waiting on feedback from the R3 to finalize the specifications on the R1.

If this statement is true, how realistic is it that Canon can roll out a R1 camera in Q4 2022 while incorporating feedback from the R3 camera that was only released a year earlier especially if the updates required hardware changes?

I have no idea. But, that won't stop speculation. My personal speculation would be that if the R1 is planned for a year from now, all the key hardware decisions have been made. It might be possible to incorporate software improvements. In my mind the logical areas to concentrate on would be autofocus algorithms and eye-controlled autofocus improvements. I don't think it would require months and months of testing to get feedback from sports and action professionals on whether or not eye-control focus is working and what would make it more usable. Similarly, they could be tweaking the "machine learning" of the autofocus system to make it more accurate.

Just to give you an example that is fresh in my mind. I'm typing this while downloading photos from a wrestling match. I decided to use the R5 because I felt the drawbacks of the R5 vs. the 1DxIII would be less important for wrestling and I figured the facial recognition software would be helpful for wrestling. One thing I found though was that the facial recognition software seemed to have a hard time finding Black wrestlers' faces. That's the kind of thing that I think Canon might be able to improve on with software before the release of the R1. (It will be interesting to see if it is better when the R3 arrives).

Just speculation on my part, but I would guess that all the major hardware decisions have been made if the camera is truly planned for 2022. But, there are probably improvements that they can make after they get the R3 in the hands of working pros and start getting feedback.

 

[TedYork]

Global shutter would have been a big differentiator. Lacking that, more MP will just bring it in line with Nikon and Sony offerings, unless it's way more MP (e.g. 80 MP). Unless there's a low-res binned mode as @john1970 suggests, with a much faster frame rate associated, it won't really be a jack of all trades, more like a 5Ds in a 1-series body.

Hopefully we'll see Canon bring out orthogonal AF lines (cross-type AF) in the R1.

I am still thinking we'll see an R5s that is 70-80 MP with low fps, and a longer wait for the R1 that will have ~30 MP, 40 fps with a really deep buffer, along with cross-type AF.

I'd like to see 16bit files myself!

 

[maulanawale]

Almost everything that is said on this and other forums, either by myself or by others, is *opinion*, and the suggestions that I and most others make are mostly about what we *personally* would like to see happen.

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?

Some suggestions or opinions will be more popular than others, and I like to think that there’s a possibility that some of the more popular ones get fed back to manufacturers by the reviewers who pick up on internet feedback.

If none of us make suggestions, or point out perceived or actual flaws, how are the manufacturers going to become aware of our needs or desires?

As for my suggestion for a 800mm F8, I’m clearly outvoted on that subject, which is absolutely fine. I don’t come here to win wars, just to express opinions or offer suggestions.

I know the point of "you're not the market", "you're not everyone" is made here ad nauseam and I get it, but at the same time (apart from the wildest of ideas), are we really that unique? I think it's safe to assume that if you'd want an 800 F8 ( me too btw) more people would too. Also the assumption that manufacturers are omniscient entities with the most up to date data can be a bit naive, that goes hand in hand with the assumption that they always play it safe. As much as they create what people want, they also know how to create the necessity (some call it hype) for products never before imagined (the F11 primes come to mind) and gamble in hopes of leapfrogging the competition.

Using the F11 primes as an example, considering its target audience (lower budget, amateurs, etc), it's hard to imagine they were clamouring for a constant (small) aperture, "weirdly" designed, ISO thirsty lens and alas, they're selling well. Of course some will say that because I can't imagine it doesn't mean the clamour wasn't there, but similar things were done in the past (catadioptric) and never caught on, so the element of gamble was there, and the success comes from doing it better this time around (i.e., no donuts and AF) not from doing what people want, but what they will want if we make it.


"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?"

Shouldn't be, common sense and all that but. . .

 

[kaihp]

Shouldn't be, common sense and all that but. . .

There's the saying that "Common Sense isn't so common"

 

[dilbert]

I have no idea. But, that won't stop speculation. My personal speculation would be that if the R1 is planned for a year from now, all the key hardware decisions have been made. It might be possible to incorporate software improvements. In my mind the logical areas to concentrate on would be autofocus algorithms and eye-controlled autofocus improvements. I don't think it would require months and months of testing to get feedback from sports and action professionals on whether or not eye-control focus is working and what would make it more usable. Similarly, they could be tweaking the "machine learning" of the autofocus system to make it more accurate.

Think about what that means. For example it means:
- collecting all of the feedback
- putting all that feedback into a database
- reading through it all and marking it up or annotating it
- spending time in meetings with people to categorise feedback further
- meetings to work out what can be addressed and what can't
- spending time to work on those changes, test them internally before going back to "betas"

There's months of elapsed time there.

Just to give you an example that is fresh in my mind. I'm typing this while downloading photos from a wrestling match. I decided to use the R5 because I felt the drawbacks of the R5 vs. the 1DxIII would be less important for wrestling and I figured the facial recognition software would be helpful for wrestling. One thing I found though was that the facial recognition software seemed to have a hard time finding Black wrestlers' faces. That's the kind of thing that I think Canon might be able to improve on with software before the release of the R1. (It will be interesting to see if it is better when the R3 arrives).

That's not surprising to hear. For a long time TV and movies failed to properly show skin tones of people of color because the equipment simply wasn't designed with them in mind. I would have hoped we'd have moved on sufficiently from that but I guess not. I won't say Canon is racist but they clearly should have been able to get their algorithms to recognise the faces of people from all over the world. Lets hope there's a firmware update.

Just speculation on my part, but I would guess that all the major hardware decisions have been made if the camera is truly planned for 2022.

Depends on what you mean by "major". In terms of the sensor, absolutely. What else would fit as major? USB interface? HDMI interface? Card slots?

 

[Bob Howland]

I have a question. According to the rumors, it mentions that Canon is waiting on feedback from the R3 to finalize the specifications on the R1.

If this statement is true, how realistic is it that Canon can roll out a R1 camera in Q4 2022 while incorporating feedback from the R3 camera that was only released a year earlier especially if the updates required hardware changes?

Very unrealistic!! If the R1 is supposed to be announced in a year, the hardware is almost certainly fixed and the firmware is in final testing.. But in keeping with the principle of using software/firmware to fix hardware, the firmware can be changed late. (Let's face it, most of the really neat stuff in the R5, R6 and R3 is firmware based.) Unless it is done carefully, there is always the possibility of "unintended consequences" otherwise known as introducing bugs. Serious bugs would severely damage Canon's reputation with buyers, especially professional photographers.

 

[john1970]

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]

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.

 

[john1970]

Or the release is further out than a year.

That scenario is also a very real possibility.