There will not be an EOS 5D Mark V [CR2]

[Michael Clark]

In fairness, some of those 5D V sales would be to people also buying the R5. I don't know if that would be me, but only because I'm waiting to see Canon's rumored 83mp monster. I've said before that if Canon released a new, higher resolution sensor in DSLR and mirrorless formats I would likely end up with one of each.

Even those who might buy both are only increasing the sales count by one 5D Mark V. They'll almost certainly buy an R5 whether or not the 5D Mark V is ever made.

Introducing a 5D Mark V will not cause very many folks, if any, that would otherwise not buy an R5 to buy an R5. On the other hand, there would have been a significant number of folks who might buy a 5 Mark V instead of an R5.

 

[Michael Clark]

When EVFs really are "just as good" as OVFs, which we've heard every year since they came out. And they're still not.

We've also been hearing, "The DSLR is dead, long live mirrorless!" since around 2012.

We're certainly 8 years closer to the death of the DSLR now in 2020 than we were in 2012, but reports of the final demise of the DSLR as a recent occurrence - to paraphrase Mark Twain - "... seem to be grossly exaggerated."

 

[Michael Clark]

If im forced to change to the R line (im 5D user from MK I to MKIV)is the adaptor lens good enough to work with the EF lens with this new body ? im very concern about this. Can anyone enlighten on this?

There's no "lens" in the adapter. None. It's a hollow tube with electronic connections between the body and lens. It's the proper thickness to space an EF lens 44mm in front of the camera's sensor, which is 24mm in front of the camera's mount flange. That's it.

There have been near countless reports posted everywhere on the interwebs saying that EF lenses are at least as good on RF bodies as they were on comparable EF bodies. They give up nothing when adapted to RF bodies that they could do on EF bodies.

Obviously, the same lens will not focus as fast on an RP as it would on a 1D X, but that same lens would not focus as fast on an EF Rebel as it would focus on a 1D X, either.

 

[Michael Clark]

$1877 USD refurbed!

$1,999 USD new with rebates from authorized Canon U.S.A. dealers for several weeks up until the end of June! I'm sure we'll see that again in the future.

 

[Michael Clark]

$1999 New USA warranty via CPW. A few weeks ago it was under $1800 and probably will be again.

Until the end of the most recently expired rebates, you didn't even need to use CPW to get a 5D Mark IV for $1,999+tax. Every authorized Canon dealer in the U.S. had it at that price, usually with a few bonus goodies such as an extra (third party) battery, memory card, or camera bag.

Refurb and New warranty in the U.S. are the same at one year now. Canon USA upped the warranty on refurb lenses and cameras from 90 days to 1-year several years ago.

 

[Michael Clark]

That's one I wish I had kept. Just got another 135mm f/2L. Won't ever sell that one again. I'll have to re-purchase all my RF glass again later.

I'm truly sorry you had to sell your RF lenses. That stinks.

 

[Michael Clark]

But the better AF only works in Liveview! So basically using a DSLR as a mirrorless camera. In which case why not use a mirrorless camera to begin with?

The EOS 1D X Mark III has a totally new type of AF sensor for the OVF. It's basically a miniature CMOS sensor, not a line sensor as has been the case with every single previous EOS DSLR for the past thirty-three years.

The AF performance of the 1D X Mark III is better than any DSLR ever produced, and damn close to the performance when using the main imaging sensor via Live View. Just ask those who are shooting with it how revolutionary the OVF based AF system of the 1D X Mark III is compared to the 1D X Mark II or any other DSLR.

 

[Michael Clark]

I saw Jared Polin use a loupe attached to the back of the 1dx3 to take sports photos with the good AF. The way he had to hold the camera looked painful! I definitely wouldn't want that kind of setup in order to get edge to edge AF.

He explained in that video that he did that in order to be able to simultaneously record what he saw for the video you watched. There's no way to look through the optical VF and at the same time record what one sees in the OVF for a YouTube video.

He also did it to compare the OVF based AF to the LV based AF, as well as to get a feel for what the R5 AF might be like. He did not do it because the OVF based AF was not "good enough".

 

[David - Sydney]

You've had better luck than me then, every new camera Ive bought has needed a new housing, other than the 40D/50D. Id love to get a housing for the R5, but I suspect the Nauticam version will make the camera look cheap.

I am sure that Nauticam will require a new housing at the normal Nauticam pricing!
I use Ikelite. They don't have complete coverage of all buttons but there is nothing that I can't work around. The Ikelite housings are also larger and has more air around it so buoyancy is more tricky. I am not making money from underwater photography so the massive price difference to Nauticam can't be justified for me.
A new Ikelite housing for sure with the R5 though... I can't imagine needing to upgrade it for a very long time
It will be my first time to sell my 5Dx housing second hand. Not sure how well they hold their value especially in a small market like Australia.

 

[Michael Clark]

I can see Orion through a 200mm f/2.8 and the Milky Way through f/1.4-f/2 UWA primes in an OVF. I've never seen an EVF approach that. EVFs are "better" in low light until they're not.

^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^

When properly adapted to the dark, my eyes can see dimmer astronomical objects via the OVF long after an EVF shows nothing but the noise floor. Not to mention that one glance in the EVF ruins that dark adaptation that took 15+ minutes to acquire.

 

[Michael Clark]

I understand that a manual transmission is now a good theft deterrent. Many car thieves don't know how to drive them, today.

 

[slclick]

We will see if this rumour sticks or not. However, when Canon went with the EOS mount they made a quick, hard cut-off leaving everyone who did not move across behind while Nikon made their system "legacy-proof." If this is way Canon wanta to go again it makes perfect sense that Canon has released two great EF to RF adapters. People can keep their lens investment that lasts very long, while Canon still get a rapid transition of their Camera production and development from EOS to R-models allowing them to focus on a single line of operation while trying to make the RF line of lenses different than the EF.

That was revolutionary, this is evolutionary.

 

[slclick]

Well, neither one of us is going to convince the other. We will just have to wait and see. I'd prefer an R7 to an M7, but I'm not optimistic that will be the case. Hoping that in 2021 we will find out who is right and we don't have to wait until 2022. Or, worse yet, that we never find out because Canon never makes either one.

An M7 would never have the toughness, speed, cards, grip or heft required for many 7D users and shooting styles. IDK why anyone is talking the M system with regards to a birding and sports body.My M5 was nice enough but it was a snapshot machine. Defending and debating a mythical potential future M bodyto be used for serious field work is a joke.

 

[Otara]

I am sure that Nauticam will require a new housing at the normal Nauticam pricing!
I use Ikelite. They don't have complete coverage of all buttons but there is nothing that I can't work around. The Ikelite housings are also larger and has more air around it so buoyancy is more tricky. I am not making money from underwater photography so the massive price difference to Nauticam can't be justified for me.
A new Ikelite housing for sure with the R5 though... it will be my first time to sell a housing second hand. Not sure how well they hold their value especially in a small market like Australia.

I was Ikelite before, I lost my first 7D due to being the old dual port lock system so bought Nauticam (amongst other reasons) and of course after years of swearing two was all that was needed, they put 4 on the next Ikelite model.

I probably wont get a housing for the R5, watching the port fill with water with that would probably end up with me on life support.

 

[Otara]

Until the 100-500/4.5-7.1, 800/11, and 600/11 are actually out in the wild, anything shot at more than 240mm was not RF. Yes, a handful of reviewers have had the new f/11 tles for a few days, and Canon Ambassadors had them for a while a little earlier, but most YouTubers are still waiting on them.

Theres the 100-500mm video with BIF and Lehman, he supposedly isnt one according to a whole thread arguing over it on DPreview, but for all practical purposes yeah.

 

[Otara]

An M7 would never have the toughness, speed, cards, grip or heft required for many 7D users and shooting styles. IDK why anyone is talking the M system with regards to a birding and sports body.My M5 was nice enough but it was a snapshot machine. Defending and debating a mythical potential future M bodyto be used for serious field work is a joke.

I would say theres a substantial potential market for lightweight BIF setups, even if its not 'serious'. Olympus has been pretty popular in that area, so its not that bizarre to expect Canon to take a look at that area with something like an M7, particularly given the 600/800 releases as a nod in that direction.

 

[David - Sydney]

I was Ikelite before, I lost my first 7D due to being the old dual port lock system so bought Nauticam (amongst other reasons) and of course after years of swearing two was all that was needed, they put 4 on the next Ikelite model.

I probably wont get a housing for the R5, watching the port fill with water with that would probably end up with me on life support.

Yeah, the old design wasn't good (2/4 lock) but the new DL version with the vacuum pump is awesome. Been out for at least 5 years now and very simple to use. I have insurance so no worries from that perspective.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

You seem to be trying to say that X can't be true because people don't expect X. But physical reality doesn't care about what you expect.

No, it can't be X because 120Hz refresh rate is in the official Canon specs (or Sony A9II specs). And I don't think it's a misleading figure because the cameras can do it with minimal delay.

I can just about guarantee you latency is longer than frame refresh. It may or may not be noticeable while you're not shooting stills depending on the latency and on subject/camera movement. But it's quite relevant when the system falls behind due to bubbles introduced while capturing still frames.

As in the beginning of this argument, I can almost guarantee the average delay between capturing and displaying will be less than 1/120s, and average delay between physical event and displaying it will be less than 1/120 + the exposure time.
'Latency' in this system, as above, is simply the processing time plus readout, and it physically can't be longer than the refresh rate (with caveats already discussed in this thread).

The system has to reset the sensor, expose, readout, process, and deliver a frame to the display buffer. Kinda doubt that's happening in 8.3 ms. Once again: latency and throughput are separate things, and after a still shot there is a bubble in the pipeline.

This system most likely does processing during exposure, so we have 8.3ms to just read it out and process/convert into the EVF buffer. It's more than enough for a 5mp image. 'Delivering a frame to the display buffer' is not a thing, the whole processing is done right in the EVF buffer so it's ready right after processing is done. Readout is most likely done in 8bit with skipping, so must be very fast.

And even if latency was 1 ms, that bubble would still exist. The image would just be closer to reality once the bubble was out. The only way around this is e-shutter + a sensor that can readout at 120 fps with interspersed full resolution frames at the advertised stills rate (say 20 fps)

Not sure what bubble you're referring to. During continuous shooting, the EVF will obviously stutter but still able to display the latest captured image after each exposure. Shooting with curtain will likely cause heavier hiccups.

 

[dtaylor]

No, it can't be X because 120Hz refresh rate is in the official Canon specs (or Sony A9II specs).

At best this implies that throughput is 120 fps, and at worst that the EVF refresh alone is 120 fps. (And in fact it's probably best and worst for the same camera depending on light levels.) But either way this advertised figure guarantees nothing about latency and nothing about the size (time) of the bubbles that are introduced by still capture.

And I don't think it's a misleading figure because the cameras can do it with minimal delay.

And that's a naked assertion which goes against observation. People are telling you they can see EVFs fall behind during burst shooting. We'll see how the R5/R6 hold up, but this has long been a problem with mirrorless.

'Latency' in this system, as above, is simply the processing time plus readout, and it physically can't be longer than the refresh rate...

It most certainly can. The path from exposure to EVF is a pipeline with discrete steps. No single step can be longer than 1/120th (assuming a true 120 fps in sufficient light), but the total path can theoretically be any length of time. That's the difference between throughput and latency.

'Delivering a frame to the display buffer' is not a thing, the whole processing is done right in the EVF buffer so it's ready right after processing is done.

It would be detrimental to performance, and difficult to code, if the processor had to interleave reads/writes with display reads. It's far easier to synchronize a single write of a completed frame against the display's 120 Hz read cycle. That EVF has its own discrete display buffer. There's no way DIGIC X is contending with the EVF for access to memory, it would just slaughter performance/efficiency.

Not sure what bubble you're referring to.

During the time it takes to readout a full resolution still frame and reset the sensor, no data is being fed to the EVF pipeline.

During continuous shooting, the EVF will obviously stutter but still able to display the latest captured image after each exposure.

Again, some cameras observably fall further behind during burst shooting. But even if the R5/R6 do not fall further behind, 1/20th or 1/12th + latency...which could be longer when processing a full resolution readout to the EVF...can be an eternity for some action sequences.

At the end of the day all that matters is the photographer's experience and performance. There's stutter on the highest end mirrorless bodies. Can you work around it and track any way? Sure. Is OVF blackout less disruptive? A lot of people think so.

 

[geffy]

This is the main reason why I absolutely hate DXO's "perceptual megapixels" nonsense.

Resolution does not work this way. Components do not "out resolve" and cap each other in this manner. System resolution is always lower than the weakest component, but improving the strongest component will still improve the final result. An R5 with a cheap 1990s consumer zoom will still produce a better image than, say, an R6 with the same lens.

The RF mount does not have inherent advantages for lens resolution. It allows designers to use some designs, for some focal lengths, which are easier to design/produce. And in those cases you might get a sharper (or cheaper or lighter) lens. But then again someone might put so much effort into the equivalent SLR lens that they have the sharper version. And for a lot of focal lengths the design will be the same, EF or RF. You just can't go by rules of thumb here, you have to test lens vs. lens in the real world.

As for the real world, there are a lot of EF lenses that sit perfectly well on a 45/50mp sensor.

if you ever put ef lenses on a smaller sensor you will see my point, a 24mp small sensor is about the same as an r5 once scaled up, my experience of older lenses on bigger sensors tell me they are the bottleneck of the system why have an 18mp image on a 45 mp camera, that is why new lenses are needed for these new cameras