The international system of units is still fun when you get to understand how the base unit is defined. The metre was originally defined to be one ten millionth of the distance between the North Pole and the Equator through Paris was a fun one.Probably the biggest hang-up in the English measuring system is the dichotomy between the statute mile and the nautical mile which was only finalized after someone actually figured out how far it really was around the world. So now we have MPH and knots to deal with. The nautical mile is a practical measure in that it takes 21,600 of them to go around the world making 1 minute of latitude equal to 1 nautical mile. Are we having fun yet?
That laughter you hear is coming from Sony, Fuji, and all the Canon faithful who are waiting for an APS-C R or some sign of life in the M.Considering the comments on resolution, I would bet that if Canon thinks there's a market for higher resolution higher speed shooting, they'll produce something to fill that need. Canon doesn't seem to be one to leave money on the table.
Thanks. And yes, high res is a must, so if the rumor hold out and its 30 and under... its effectively DOA for me.Some great shots on your flickr pages! Lighter weight and higher resolution of the R5 enabling shorter, lighter lenses swing it the other way for me.
I have zero appetite for a $8000+ full bodied R5. The funny thing... I initially thought Canon broke everyone else's line up with all these new cameras, little did I know, they were breaking their own. An A9 competitor, priced around $2000 up the hill with two other flagships is not ideal IMO.Bummer, there goes the option of upgrading my EF bodies to RF this year. Hoping for the R1 - but not holding my breath after this.
Lat's hope Canon gives the R1
- internal GPS ,
- the eye controlled AF (if it's any good),
- 45 MP or more.
They can bin all the video stuff for all I care - I'll never use it anyway. I also don't need 30fps pictures. I take photographs, no video.
Now even if I look at a R5 + a nice set of RF lenses to replace my EF ones - The CC is yelling OUCH!
Sorry, but who is laughing?That laughter you hear is coming from Sony, Fuji, and all the Canon faithful who are waiting for an APS-C R or some sign of life in the M.
All that proves is that Canon is profitable. It doesn't mean they're not leaving money on the table, which was the original statement.Sorry, but who is laughing?
Canon celebrates 18th consecutive year of No. 1 share of global interchangeable-lens digital camera market | Canon GlobalTOKYO, March 29, 2021—Canon Inc. announced today that the company's interchangeable-lens digital cameras (digital SLR and mirrorless cameras) have maintained the No. 1 share of the global market for 18 consecutive years1 from 2003 to 2020.global.canon
Canon is selling about as many ILCs as Sony and Nikon combined, and Fuji is barely a blip in the global market (but they sell tons of Instax cameras). You don’t seem to grasp who’s lunch is being eaten by whom.Canon is letting those other guys eat their lunch.
Yes. In the development and "in the wild" testing phase anything about the camera can be restricted to make it appear something is this instead of that or sometimes somethings are not even there. Canon has gone as far as a man made one off circuit board inside with fake model codes in case the test body fell into the wrong hands. Early prototypes will often have parts from other cameras inside also.As I asked in the other thread, could these cameras not be restricted in firmware to output max 24 MP JPG files?
AF machine learning works best with as little noise as possible. When you use higher resolution sensors, you increase sensor noise. Your statement is correct up until you are shooting in lower light, or with longer lenses at higher aperture. Sports, photo journalism, and action are three areas that lighting isn't ideal which is why you see 20.1 mp in the 1DX mkii and you'll likely see under 30mp on the R3. It is considerably more work for machine learning or AI AF when there is noise to also sort through when nanoseconds matter.The higher the density, the more pixel information for machine learning to recognise subjects and the better the AF. The more pixels you put on your subject the better the AF, not the worse.
This is false, my R5 performs far better in low light than my a9ii and it has double the resolution. You talk of supply chain issues and such, implying it is some sort of excuse? And yet the a1 was released with all of these "supply chain" issues...When you're a professional photo journalist, action, or sports photographer; switching to a rival camera system is the option. The gear is paid for on your first or second assignment. The semi-pro and enthusiast crowd own pro bodies as a luxury item.
There is nothing "previous" about a current pro-body DSLR. 24mp on a camera coming out with supply chain issues, a slowdown in events, that is stacked BSI, shoots with less shutter distortion, and sends the correct resolution and files sizes wirelessly to clients for events is what is demanded by the industry. Canon spends a lot of time working with photographers in the field to come up with solutions that are both reliable and won't financially impact their strategic growth. I would rather know that my rugged pro body will be supported for years to come as it makes me money, then worry about whether or not the spec-sheet stacks up against expensive competitors with their own downsides.
The higher density the sensor, the poorer the low light condition, and the less advanced your AI can be for things like Eye Control AF and machine learning for recognizing fast moving subjects. This is a very exciting step in the future of AF systems which has been Canon's focus (pun intended) for decades.
How many times does this have to be disproven on these very forums? Pixel density does not negatively impact total image noise within a format. As for the AI, I would be surprised if anyone is feeding full resolution sensor readouts to said AI for AF point selection.AF machine learning works best with as little noise as possible. When you use higher resolution sensors, you increase sensor noise.