The Canon EOS R5 Mark II – We have now seen it

[[email protected]]

big billboards can use a stupid low resolution because the observer distance is so far, you don't need high resolution.

it all comes down to image magnification and observer distance.

Highway billboards yes. Other outdoor advertising, sometimes no. My first job out of college was with Leo Burnett, the huge ad agency in Chicago. They bought about half the outdoor advertising avails in the US at the time (mostly for McDonald's and Philip Morris). Quickly growing was bus stop outdoor, and sometimes we had to reshoot creative for it. It was a fraction of the size, but people sat their staring at it from arms-length. There were some hard lessons back then. An outdoor ad production budget back then was about $150,000 in 1993 dollars, just for the image.

None of this was digital, of course. The people we hired were mostly using medium format.

I'm curious now. Will call a couple people to see what equipment their production people are using. I really couldn't guess, but I doubt it's 24 mp.

EDIT: Interesting. Called a couple guys. For a bus shelter ad (47.5" by 68.5") slumming would be a 90 mp image. They'd prefer 300 mp. Sometimes a photo extends over the complete surface, but sometimes it's just a piece of the area, so a 24 mp image would be fine. On the other hand, they'll often crop out a piece of a photo to use in that fashion, so it varies a lot. Another friend indicated that a lot of people are upsizing smaller images. What's too little resolution? "Know it when I see it." What he's talking about is between 150 and 300 dpi, btw. He's not giving much credit to view distance when people are often leaning against the photo. Also should note that these guys work at large agencies, where they are less likely to purchase stock imagery because they're executing creative concepts that are 9 months in the making/approval. They indicate that there are plenty of smaller agencies that pump out text-on-color-background type ads, and they assume the lower resolutions are used almost exclusively. The upshot: 24 mp is probably used more, but you're getting paid a stock use fee probably < $5k. If you're commissioned for an original photo for an ad, you're getting >$20k and you're not shooting 24 mp if it's for outdoor. But those jobs are more rarified now.

EDIT 2: Had another response from a friend who now works in UK. They’re similar. Minimum on spec sheet is 67mp image in effect, which then gets enlarged. That isn’t necessarily the photo, but the whole ad. Some other interesting requirements, like the fact that it can’t have anything on it that might be mistaken for a traffic signal or sign. Kind of makes sense.

 

[Quack]

45 megapixels can hardly be considered high res. Not in todays market. Canon doesn't have a high resolution camera and it hasn't had one since 5DSR.

Hmmm today's market of leading FF cameras, and their highest MPs...

Sony 61 MP
Nikon 45 MP
Canon 45 MP

Looks to me like you could consider 45 MPs a high res camera in today's market.

 

[David - Sydney]

I had one like that, it wasn't a benro, I can't remember the brand now. it will come to me. Not sure if it was a skywatcher (nope, skytracker)

of course the tough thing is always polar alignment.

found it...

View attachment 217225

Yeah, the Benro looks to be pretty special (small, good, average price vs bigger EQ mounts). The automation puts it above my star adventurer 2i. Some use it for deep sky but I can't comment on it.

Polar alignment is interesting... my eyesight isn't good so aligning the southern celestial pole was difficult. I found that using apps and aligning the phone on top of the tracker meant I could get close enough for 2 minute exposures without trailing so I was a happy camper. The workshop guide looked bemused as manual/optical alignment is as fundamental as understanding the exposure triangle and an app made it irrelevant.
The benro needs precise leveling but polar alignment after that is simple.

 

[nhandumuc]

Yeah, the Benro looks to be pretty special (small, good, average price vs bigger EQ mounts). The automation puts it above my star adventurer 2i. Some use it for deep sky but I can't comment on it.

Polar alignment is interesting... my eyesight isn't good so aligning the southern celestial pole was difficult. I found that using apps and aligning the phone on top of the tracker meant I could get close enough for 2 minute exposures without trailing so I was a happy camper. The workshop guide looked bemused as manual/optical alignment is as fundamental as understanding the exposure triangle and an app made it irrelevant.
The benro needs precise leveling but polar alignment after that is simple.

View attachment 217242

Just use a phone compass pointing at north will get you 2 mins pin point exposures at 35mm so there is no need for the polar scope alignment, at high focal length I will use a StarAid or ZWO Asiair to PA, much better accurate than the rough compass alignment.

 

[Richard CN]

I'm going to jump back in here once the dust has settled. it's been a busy day, but I'm learning lots in this thread

 

[P-visie]

I'm going to jump back in here once the dust has settled. it's been a busy day, but I'm learning lots in this thread

Once the star dust settles?

 

[usern4cr]

The one thing I'd like to see in the R5 II is the GPS. If power drain is an issue, then an easy fix is to offer a user option to program a single button press & release to turn on the GPS to get a location and then turn off GPS. That location would be assigned to all photos taken after that point. So if I go to a new location I could hit that button once, and all subsequent photos get that new location stored. So the GPS is never on continuously and therefore I don't see how power consumption could be an issue at all. This could be one user option among others for those that want the GPS to be on continuously if they're OK with that power consumption. Of course, Canon will either have GPS or not on it, so what I want makes no difference and I have already decided to get one R5 II no matter what they've added to it since I've been waiting so long for it to come out.

EDIT UPDATE: The GPS sequence of power up GPS - get info (no matter how slow) - power down GPS would be done in the *background*, while normal operations are done in the foreground. Once the GPS info is found, it would assign it to all phots taken since the start of the GPS acquisition. This is a simple thing to do with any processor(s) that have the ability to multi-task. I'm a retired professional arcade/console game programmer, and I've implemented background / foreground processing repeatedly since the start of my career (over 40 years ago) and that's back before there was multi-tasking hardware to make it easy. It's an easy thing to do if you're a smart programmer, and I think Canon is surely capable of hiring smart programmers.

Also, if the GPS acquisition sequence has not finished before the user flips the button to shut off the camera, it could alert the user that it will auto-shutdown after the GPS sequence is complete, unless the user chooses to shut down immediately and knows that they choose to not have any GPS info stored for those photos.

 

[koenkooi]

The one thing I'd like to see in the R5 II is the GPS. If power drain is an issue, then an easy fix is to offer a user option to program a single button press & release to turn on the GPS to get a location and then turn off GPS. That location would be assigned to all photos taken after that point. So if I go to a new location I could hit that button once, and all subsequent photos get that new location stored. So the GPS is never on continuously and therefore I don't see how power consumption could be an issue at all. This could be one user option among others for those that want the GPS to be on continuously if they're OK with that power consumption. Of course, Canon will either have GPS or not on it, so what I want makes no difference and I have already decided to get one R5 II no matter what they've added to it since I've been waiting so long for it to come out.

Keep in mind that GPS isn’t an instant thing and if you want a fast fix, you have to preload ephemeris data every morning. So you’re trading wifi/5g for gps.
Dialing down the update rate to every 30 seconds or so would save power, but not an impressive amount.

But yes, I’d also like builtin GPS, if only for having the correct time

 

[scyrene]

I update firmwares religiously as soon as announced

I'm the opposite

 

[Richard CN]

The one thing I'd like to see in the R5 II is the GPS. If power drain is an issue, then an easy fix is to offer a user option to program a single button press & release to turn on the GPS to get a location and then turn off GPS. That location would be assigned to all photos taken after that point. So if I go to a new location I could hit that button once, and all subsequent photos get that new location stored. So the GPS is never on continuously and therefore I don't see how power consumption could be an issue at all. This could be one user option among others for those that want the GPS to be on continuously if they're OK with that power consumption. Of course, Canon will either have GPS or not on it, so what I want makes no difference and I have already decided to get one R5 II no matter what they've added to it since I've been waiting so long for it to come out.

while this sounds good - the acquisition time takes too long for what you are wanting.

from a cold start it takes a while because the GPS has no knowledge about where you are. if it's in a warm start (ie: has some awareness of where approximately you are) then the fix can be much faster. but that warm start data is only valid for 4 hours - and after that you have to do the cold start again.

But from a cold start it can take over 1-3 minutes.

To be honest, this is too easy to do via BLE now, and who doesn't carry a phone with them? I get the no muss no fuss of everything in the camera though.

 

[Richard CN]

Once the star dust settles?

we are all star dust!

it's been a busy few days and I'm travelling too - naturally.

 

[Deleted member 396222]

And here we go again, comparing a 2016 sensor against a 2023 sensor when comparing results.
I start to believe that they don't even have the equipment they are talking about and if they do, they don't even know how to use it.

Thank you. 1) Why do so many have to reply to these posts with a negative zing? So sad. 2) Missed my point: If looking for a substantial improvement in IQ, the Canon rumors on the R5ii have been out since November 2022 when you could have had the Z8 and be on with all the Canon lenses we love..

 

[Deleted member 396222]

I would hope so. the Z8 is a 45mp mirrorless camera that will focus spot on with those lenses, versus a 30mp DSLR that used an approximation and necessary calibration for AF because of off sensor auto focus.

Exactly.. So what I don't understand.. If folks are waiting for a great Mirrorless, that can use their Canon lens investment with zero IQ loss, what have the been waiting for?

 

[P-visie]

while this sounds good - the acquisition time takes too long for what you are wanting.

from a cold start it takes a while because the GPS has no knowledge about where you are. if it's in a warm start (ie: has some awareness of where approximately you are) then the fix can be much faster. but that warm start data is only valid for 4 hours - and after that you have to do the cold start again.

But from a cold start it can take over 1-3 minutes.

To be honest, this is too easy to do via BLE now, and who doesn't carry a phone with them? I get the no muss no fuss of everything in the camera though.

If my experiences with the R5 are representative: using a phone with bluetooth for gps requires a major overhaul to both bluetooth connectivity in the camera and the Canon app to fix very frequent dropping of the bluetooth connection between to camera and the phone and incorrect gps coordinates.

 

[koenkooi]

If my experiences with the R5 are representative: using a phone with bluetooth for gps requires a major overhaul to both bluetooth connectivity in the camera and the Canon app to fix very frequent dropping of the bluetooth connection between to camera and the phone and incorrect gps coordinates.

I ‘fixed’ the wrong coordinates by setting location access to ‘always’ for camera connect in the iOS settings app. Now I just need to wait a few seconds after waking up the camera for GPS to work.
It is ‘good enough’ for me that I haven’t used the GP-E2 in a while. But I would still prefer built-in GPS on bodies with LP-E6 batteries.

 

[amorse]

Exactly.. So what I don't understand.. If folks are waiting for a great Mirrorless, that can use their Canon lens investment with zero IQ loss, what have the been waiting for?

I'm going to go ahead and assume this isn't a rhetorical question. I'd suggest that given that this is a Canon forum, I suspect they're waiting for an offering from Canon rather than changing their body even if the Z series can accept EF lenses using an adapter.

I'm a 5D IV user and I'm content to wait for the R5II over transitioning to a Z 8. That's not to say the Z 8 isn't a great camera - it is. I just don't want to change for plenty of reasons:

• I own plenty of other things than lenses that work with my Canon bodies but won't work with a Nikon body,
• I already have a really good muscle memory for how to navigate Canon menus and operate Canon cameras with my eyes closed which I do not have for Nikon bodies - and I don't really want to re-learn all that,
• I don't like that the Nikon bodies crop settings can't be adjusted in the raw image after you take a photo (it discards the cropped pixel data rather than allowing you to change it on the computer),
• I'm very familiar with how Canon sensors render colour and detail and am very comfortable with working with the files, but have less of that experience with Nikon,
• I'm more interested in the RF lens offerings than Z lens offerings
• Even if I use EF lenses on an R body, I'd rather have access to the adapters provided by Canon with the control ring and/or the filter adapter ring
• I'd prefer to use within brand lenses/bodies if I can as using Canon lenses on other bodies seems to come with some auto-focus challenges
• I routinely burn through up to 7 LP-E6NHs in an outing, and plan to continue using my 5DIV as a backup - I really don't want to have to have two different kinds of batteries, two different chargers, and two different procedures for shooting because my backup and primary body are from different manufacturers

For me, the Z 8 doesn't really offer me a good reason to make the jump to Nikon. Left with the decision absent an R5ii (since as of today it does not exist), I'd likely choose an R5 over a Z 8 as the R5 performance at that price point is more attractive to me than switching to a Z 8 and addressing all the concerns I've listed above. It's different for everyone though, and if you're happy with your transition, then that's great! To each their own. I'm not in a rush to change, and I like to see all my options before I make big changes.

Missed my point: If looking for a substantial improvement in IQ, the Canon rumors on the R5ii have been out since November 2022 when you could have had the Z8 and be on with all the Canon lenses we love..

To be fair, while the R5 has marginally less resolution than the Z 8, it does (on paper) have better dynamic range than the Z 8, so if it is strictly a question on which body has better IQ, I'm not fully convinced that the pain of switching to another camera manufacturer is offset by improvements in IQ by the Z 8. This is even more relevant when I consider that the nearly 3-year older R5 is performing better in dynamic range, let alone how a theoretical R5ii may perform.



That's just my experience, and everyone has different needs. I'm happy the Z 8 is working for you, but I'd just suggest that everyone has different needs, and I don't think many of those waiting for an R5ii and engaging in this forum are unaware that the Z 8 exists and offers a comparable package to the R5, and potentially an R5ii. That may be where some of the snark comes from - for me, these posts comes across as suggesting that "Canon users are dumb for waiting for for an R5ii because they can have a Z 8 today", and at least on my end, that misses the reasons why people choose to wait or jump to another brand and seems a bit judgmental. Maybe that's not your intention, but it is how the comments come across to me. Just a little friendly food for thought.

 

[Richard CN]

If my experiences with the R5 are representative: using a phone with bluetooth for gps requires a major overhaul to both bluetooth connectivity in the camera and the Canon app to fix very frequent dropping of the bluetooth connection between to camera and the phone and incorrect gps coordinates.

God yes. what is with camera companies that they can't do something this straightforward.

 

[usern4cr]

Keep in mind that GPS isn’t an instant thing and if you want a fast fix, you have to preload ephemeris data every morning. So you’re trading wifi/5g for gps.
Dialing down the update rate to every 30 seconds or so would save power, but not an impressive amount.

But yes, I’d also like builtin GPS, if only for having the correct time

GPS acquisition latency should not affect shooting speed at all, provided that the Canon software is smart enough to do it's GPS on-get info-off sequence in the background, while other things (like taking photos) takes place. Once the GPS location is found, it would then assign that position to all of the photos taken after the press of the button that started the GPS acquisition. This is an easy thing to do, and something that should be obvious to any good programmer implementing it.

 

[usern4cr]

while this sounds good - the acquisition time takes too long for what you are wanting.

from a cold start it takes a while because the GPS has no knowledge about where you are. if it's in a warm start (ie: has some awareness of where approximately you are) then the fix can be much faster. but that warm start data is only valid for 4 hours - and after that you have to do the cold start again.

But from a cold start it can take over 1-3 minutes.

To be honest, this is too easy to do via BLE now, and who doesn't carry a phone with them? I get the no muss no fuss of everything in the camera though.

The GPS acquisition should be done in the background while any other operation is in progress, so that there is *no* delay for the user. Once the correct GPS position is found it would then assign that value to all photos taken since the start of the get-GPS button press. This is a simple thing to be done in the background if Canon has good programmers. And I'm a retired professional programmer who knows that background processing can easily be done without affecting foreground processing.

 

[koenkooi]

GPS acquisition latency should not affect shooting speed at all, provided that the Canon software is smart enough to do it's GPS on-get info-off sequence in the background, while other things (like taking photos) takes place. Once the GPS location is found, it would then assign that position to all of the photos taken after the press of the button that started the GPS acquisition. This is an easy thing to do, and something that should be obvious to any good programmer implementing it.

It does everything in the background already, but it will only start tagging after acquisition, which is the least bad thing to do.
Take the case where you are taking pictures from the backseat of a moving car, you can move quite far from the original spot while the gps is gps’ing.

Olympus has builtin logging in their phone app, so you can retroactively tag pictures, canon has something similar, but only for powershot cameras…