The RF mount mirrorless version of the EOS-1D X Mark III is coming in 2021 [CR3]

[privatebydesign]

It was USM AF which was enabled by the all-electronic interface between the camera body and the lens that put Canon ahead of Nikon.

In 1987 when Canon introduced the EOS system, over 75% of professionals shooting in the 135 format used Nikon. Having said that, there were plenty of pros in the remaining 25% who shot Canon F1s. There were certainly pro-grade accessories available for the F1, such as high speed motor drives , as compared to consumer level lower speed power winders, and high capacity film magazines that could hold as much as 35 feet (250 frames) of bulk film.

View attachment 193016

A scant five years later, in 1992, Canon had overtaken Nikon as the #1 camera used by working pros who shot 135 - there were still a ton of pros using 645 or larger format film.

I was shooting Canon professionally pre 1987.

Here is my F-1N with my FN-100 bulk film back, that I sold a couple of years ago (the back I still have the camera). It only took 100 exposures not the 250 of the earlier version but was useful non the less, particularly for 'remote' shooting (I had a 50' air remote release) where changing the roll of film wasn't practical.

 

[Methodical]

I like R1 D.

Then the next one can be the R2 D.

Then a minor revision of that one can be the R2 D2!

I think they should keep the letter "D" in the name to retain it's historical significance and to distinguish it from the other camera bodies. We will see fairly soon.

 

[StevenA]

Sorry, that retort was as weak as the supposed sarcasm. Simpler crowd? Insults as well? Take a hike.

Oh we have struck a nerve have we? My original post was meant to be light humor by taking the thread title literally. You came back attacking my intelligence and remarked I should take a class. Really? Because taken LITERALLY the title of this thread indicates what I joked about. It literally does. Read it again if you aren't sure. Or take a class. You're actually trying to pick an argument over your misunderstanding of my post?

Yes, I do believe you to be a simpler mind. Yes. For sure. No doubt about it. You can reply if you must. But I've truly got no time for your type or your simpler mind, so I won't be reading it.

 

[MVPhoto]

For R1 specs, I'd much prefer a 24mp, 6K60 / 4K120 with compressed RAW & h.265 without pixel binning like the R5 does.... and then sensor tech from the C70 / C300! That DGO sensor looks amazing!

 

[Danglin52]

I'm waiting for my R5...hoping to have it before the Eagle season gets hot. I will have to wait to see what it can do with sports photography.

Some folks will take a big hit if (when) this new body arrives and they decide to sell their 1DX3, but some folks will be very giddy at the same time. The introduction of the R5 is the first time I've been this excited about a non-1D camera body. I just wish they make the new body without all of that video stuff. I know it won't happen, but that's my wish.

I think you’ll like the R5. My only complaint is the camera is slower to wake up than a DSLR. The DSLR Had reached a point of almost instant availability. I strongly recommend you buy extra batteries. Totally agree with your prior comment that the 300 & 500 will be the first big whites. I would also add the 200–400 In some form as a candidate for early RF treatment.

 

[tpatana]

Thinking from the angle that what R1 could provide that R5/R6 doesn't already have. The list is not that long, or my imagination is bad.

-size/ergonomics: nice, but not enough compared to gripped R5/R6
-battery life: same as above
-weather sealing: yes, but not huge difference unless it's water proof to 10m
-modular card slot to swap CFExpress, CFast, CF or SD
-buffer: R5/R6 already good enough
-display & EVF: there's some to be improved, but R5/R6 are already pretty good
-fps: maybe 20fps mechanical, 30fps e-shutter?

So unless they bring something on the table that I can't think about, I probably would rather buy R5+R6 as the price is assumed to be similar. Did canon make R5/R6 too good?

 

[SteveC]

So unless they bring something on the table that I can't think about, I probably would rather buy R5+R6 as the price is assumed to be similar. Did canon make R5/R6 too good?

I've been wondering that myself. It's basically going to be R5 build quality with an R6-like sensor (but not exactly the same, I hasten to add!), and a built in grip. What am I missing/forgetting about (as unfamiliar as I am with 1 series)?

 

[tpatana]

I've been wondering that myself. It's basically going to be R5 build quality with an R6-like sensor (but not exactly the same, I hasten to add!), and a built in grip. What am I missing/forgetting about (as unfamiliar as I am with 1 series)?

They could further improve the AF performance, make it track well even in more dim conditions, go from eye-detection to pupil-detection. Could have separate IC just for AF. But hearing how good R5/R6 is, it's tough spot to make it enough better to justify R1 instead of R5+R6 combo.

 

[Michael Clark]

Best part of the news!

Let the pro bodies raise up in MP! Maybe 24-30MP!

Big need:
NO SHUTTER BLACKOUT AND LAG!
And 120Hz+ 5MP EVF minimum!

Will there be a battle of Sony and Canon? Anything about Nikon ?
But Sonys A9II isn't that old... hm

For R1 specs, I'd much prefer a 24mp, 6K60 / 4K120 with compressed RAW & h.265 without pixel binning like the R5 does.... and then sensor tech from the C70 / C300! That DGO sensor looks amazing!

There's no real practical difference between 20 MP and 24 MP. That's only 9.5% more pixels per linear dimensions. A 20 MP FF sensor has a pixel pitch of 6.58µm. A 24 MP FF sensor would have a pitch of 6.01µm. 26 MP is only 15% more linear resolution than 20 MP.

One really needs to get close to 30 MP before it's really significantly more resolution.

29 MP is 20% more linear resolution than 20 MP.
32 MP is 26% more linear resolution than 20 MP.

 

[Michael Clark]

Thinking from the angle that what R1 could provide that R5/R6 doesn't already have. The list is not that long, or my imagination is bad.

-size/ergonomics: nice, but not enough compared to gripped R5/R6
-battery life: same as above
-weather sealing: yes, but not huge difference unless it's water proof to 10m
-modular card slot to swap CFExpress, CFast, CF or SD
-buffer: R5/R6 already good enough
-display & EVF: there's some to be improved, but R5/R6 are already pretty good
-fps: maybe 20fps mechanical, 30fps e-shutter?

So unless they bring something on the table that I can't think about, I probably would rather buy R5+R6 as the price is assumed to be similar. Did canon make R5/R6 too good?

Maintain raw bit depth at 14-bits when shooting with electronic silent shutter and 20 fps mechanical shutter.

The 1D X Mark III drops to 12-bit with electronic shutter at any frame rate, and also with 20 fps mechanical shutter.

The R5 and R6 are similar, though I don't have the exact specs at the tip of my mind at the moment.

 

[koenkooi]

Maintain raw bit depth at 14-bits when shooting with electronic silent shutter and 20 fps mechanical shutter.

The 1D X Mark III drops to 12-bit with electronic shutter at any frame rate, and also with 20 fps mechanical shutter.

The R5 and R6 are similar, though I don't have the exact specs at the tip of my mind at the moment.

The R5 also goes down to 13-bit in 12fps mechanical mode.

 

[Bishop80]

The 1D X Mark III drops to 12-bit with electronic shutter at any frame rate, and also with 20 fps mechanical shutter.

Where is this documented?
Canon documentation that I have read indicates that 12-bit A/D conversion is done for electronic shutter, but not Live View mechanical shutter.

 

[VegasCameraGuy]

My first canon was an F1 if i could even remotely afford this my last canon would be an R1

LOL I've still got my motor drive F1.