The Canon EOS R5 will begin shipping before the Summer Olympics

Danglin52

Wildlife Shooter
Aug 8, 2018
317
335
Why would the CPS point scheme be related to being a pro product?
The point scheme is losely related to the cost and/or profit they make with a certain product.

I only posted it as a reference that these are the camera bodies that Canon uses to establish your eligibility for Canon PROFESSIONAL Services. Reality is that the points are price/age of body weighted. It was na information point. Canon apparently considers these bodies as qualifying for special attention and treatment - much different service than when my M5 died.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,846
2,193
Tiny bit correction: The concept of pro-level mirrorless was not born in 2018 w/ the EOS R, it started w/ the 7D era (approx 2012) w/ the DPAF in Liveview. Like many are uttering, I wish the R5 will make the 1DXiii obsolete in July 2020. The R5 should be a significant incremental improvement to the 5D but w/o the mirror box.


I shot a 7D as a second body from 2011 until 2015. It was not a "pro" body. It was a "not quite ready for prime time" body that felt like a pro body when shooting, but didn't look like a pro body when examining the output.

The 7D Mark II is the "pro" body that the 7D should have been.
 

Danglin52

Wildlife Shooter
Aug 8, 2018
317
335
Why would the CPS point scheme be related to being a pro product?
The point scheme is losely related to the cost and/or profit they make with a certain product.

Regardless, it is used as a method of evaluation to qualify for Canon Professional Services. If this gear qualifies for a pro oriented service offering and is used to qualify for that service, does Canon consider a pro level body? The Cinema cameras are the only other bodies used to determine eligibility - no XXD M, etc..

Maybe we need a separate offering - Canon Prosumer Services!

You guys are taking this WAY too seriously.
 
Last edited:

joestopper

Rrr...
Feb 4, 2020
233
211
I only posted it as a reference that these are the camera bodies that Canon uses to establish your eligibility for Canon PROFESSIONAL Services. Reality is that the points are price/age of body weighted. It was na information point. Canon apparently considers these bodies as qualifying for special attention and treatment - much different service than when my M5 died.

But even the M100 (not in your list) qualifies in for accruing CPS points ...
 

GoldWing

Canon EOS 1DXMKII
Oct 19, 2013
332
241
Los Angeles, CA
en.wikipedia.org
To me it's all vaporware. After the 1DXMKIII being such a disappointment for us "low life" still sports shooters.... I don't think Canon is anywhere near a professional body that will show a marked improvement in IQ with an OVF. Canon pushing the MKIII for the Olympics is almost laughable. It's a very modest "still" improvement and to be considered and upgrade is insulting.

The IQ is horrible, the color rendition is flat and muddled, definition lacks, noise in shadows at moderate and low ISO show clear green and purple, DR is very poor in contrasting areas, the ovf focus points when using single-point are hard to see, the awb is off to such an extent on some settings that we felt there must be an upgrade or firmware fix or something coming, the reader the camera came with does not work, wi-fi and communications protocols are not intuitive, the scrolling menus are nice but static, shooting mode should have large easy to read and responsive indicators in the VF well lit. Canon got the 1DXMKIII so wrong and it's buggy with some lenses, strobes and flashes, Now we want to talk a bout "another" pro body??? How about they get the one that came out a few days ago right first??????

Frustrating seeing promos, marketing and rumors to boots interest or sales in a future camera(s) when others are left baffled at what Canon is doing "Today" in "Reality" where we expected a "flagship" that was supposed to be a marked upgrade for still sports photographers. How do you not improve IQ???????
 

dominic_siu

EOS R5, RF2870, RF70200 2.8, RF50 1.8, RF100 Macro
Aug 31, 2018
85
68
Any sense as to how the 2 new bodies are being positioned?
Is the R5 a jack of all trades or more sports oriented. I cant tell which body I should be saving for?

I am a wildlife shooter and am overduefor a new body
You need R5
 

YuengLinger

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,551
2,019
USA
To me it's all vaporware. After the 1DXMKIII being such a disappointment for us "low life" still sports shooters.... I don't think Canon is anywhere near a professional body that will show a marked improvement in IQ with an OVF. Canon pushing the MKIII for the Olympics is almost laughable. It's a very modest "still" improvement and to be considered and upgrade is insulting.

The IQ is horrible, the color rendition is flat and muddled, definition lacks, noise in shadows at moderate and low ISO show clear green and purple, DR is very poor in contrasting areas, the ovf focus points when using single-point are hard to see, the awb is off to such an extent on some settings that we felt there must be an upgrade or firmware fix or something coming, the reader the camera came with does not work, wi-fi and communications protocols are not intuitive, the scrolling menus are nice but static, shooting mode should have large easy to read and responsive indicators in the VF well lit. Canon got the 1DXMKIII so wrong and it's buggy with some lenses, strobes and flashes, Now we want to talk a bout "another" pro body??? How about they get the one that came out a few days ago right first??????

Frustrating seeing promos, marketing and rumors to boots interest or sales in a future camera(s) when others are left baffled at what Canon is doing "Today" in "Reality" where we expected a "flagship" that was supposed to be a marked upgrade for still sports photographers. How do you not improve IQ???????


Please post some of the RAW files you've made with this camera so we can see what you are talking about for ourselves.
 

Danglin52

Wildlife Shooter
Aug 8, 2018
317
335
But even the M100 (not in your list) qualifies in for accruing CPS points ...
The list was copied directly from the CPS site equipment list that qualified minus the Cinema cameras. I just logged into my CPS after seeing your post and looked for your m100 - no m100 on the Add products drop down list. They had added the 90d. There was a c100 Cinema camera on the list.
 

canonnews

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2017
852
1,402
Canada
www.canonnews.com
The list was copied directly from the CPS site equipment list that qualified minus the Cinema cameras. I just logged into my CPS after seeing your post and looked for your m100 - no m100 on the Add products drop down list. They had added the 90d. There was a c100 Cinema camera on the list.
Canon has always had prosumer equipment listed in CPS, primarily because a lot of pros would have that for their back up gear.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,423
4,075
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
.... I don't think Canon is anywhere near a professional body that will show a marked improvement in IQ with an OVF...

As a heavy user of the R, I am skeptical that the next generation of mirrorless will have advanced sufficiently to compete with a DSLR for nature or action. I'd like to be wrong, but I'll wait until the R5 is actually released and out in the field before getting my hopes up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ruiloba

canonnews

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2017
852
1,402
Canada
www.canonnews.com
To me it's all vaporware. After the 1DXMKIII being such a disappointment for us "low life" still sports shooters.... I don't think Canon is anywhere near a professional body that will show a marked improvement in IQ with an OVF. Canon pushing the MKIII for the Olympics is almost laughable. It's a very modest "still" improvement and to be considered and upgrade is insulting.

The IQ is horrible, the color rendition is flat and muddled, definition lacks, noise in shadows at moderate and low ISO show clear green and purple, DR is very poor in contrasting areas, the ovf focus points when using single-point are hard to see, the awb is off to such an extent on some settings that we felt there must be an upgrade or firmware fix or something coming, the reader the camera came with does not work, wi-fi and communications protocols are not intuitive, the scrolling menus are nice but static, shooting mode should have large easy to read and responsive indicators in the VF well lit. Canon got the 1DXMKIII so wrong and it's buggy with some lenses, strobes and flashes, Now we want to talk a bout "another" pro body??? How about they get the one that came out a few days ago right first??????

Frustrating seeing promos, marketing and rumors to boots interest or sales in a future camera(s) when others are left baffled at what Canon is doing "Today" in "Reality" where we expected a "flagship" that was supposed to be a marked upgrade for still sports photographers. How do you not improve IQ???????
I saw your post on dpreview. you sure you didn't get a body that you're just not happy with? you have historically gotten the worst 1DX Mark II cameras in existance, sounds like it's continuing. Everyone is loving it elsewhere, ie: Fredmiranda.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,846
2,193
I'm going to engage in pure uneducated speculation here: What if all they do in advance is put the hardware together?

As they receive orders, they load the latest and greatest firmware, then they stick the camera in the box and ship it.

There has to be some kind of firmware loaded to map the pixels before it leaves the factory. There also must be a basic firmware already loaded that allows the firmware to be updated via a memory card, since the camera must boot and initialize the bus connected to the memory card in order to load the updated firmware.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rule556