I was only responding to your comment about understanding market segmentation. I acknowledged in my post that their decision could be a mistake and only time would justify or condemn their approach. The merit of their strategy would also depend on their product release plans which none of those outside the company or NDA are aware. They did a great job of keeping the R3 under wraps and close to unknown until the actual development announcement. I know there has been debate about the camera being relabeled from an R1 due to competition, but anyone with product development and marketing knowledge knows you don't change a direction close to launch (you stated this yourself). It would be nice to have a camera that does it all, but many times the Swiss Army knife approach manages to do a lot of things while not doing all of them in an optimized manner. They continue to expand the base technology platform, but keep layering on more compute and data bandwidth intensive tasks that bump up against the platform limits. As to creating multiple resolution of files from a larger sensor, I experimented with this on my R5 compared to an R6 I rented for a trip to YNP. While the downsized R5 files @ 12,800 were not bad, I felt the R6 files were "crisper" with less noise when shot in similar lighting situations. I switched lenses for the test and the light was consistent between shots (an elk grazing late afternoon around sunset). These were natural high ISO shots vs just cranking the ISO up to 12,800 in bright sunlight.You misunderstand me.
YES, by ALL MEANS sell two if you can affordably engineer and market two.
But is Canon releasing two cameras?
No. In fact the rumor mill says after the R3 the next TWO cameras will be cheap models, if I recall correctly.
So they're not "selling two," they're selling one and leaving the other market (slow/hi-IQ) unserved. (Well, we DO have the R5, which is awesome; I was just hoping to move from R to R3, but maybe I have to do R to R5 to R1???)
Now I'd agree with you that having two market segments, and serving one now, and the other at least 3 cameras later, if that is their strategy, MIGHT be more profitable than my proposal of a slow/hi-MP camera tweaked so it can also produce lo-MP images as quickly as a lo-MP camera could. But maybe its not.
I've worked six years of my career in Japanese firms in Japan in Japanese, and while everyone here seems to think they're geniuses at making these decisions, the way it works is there will be a group with some rough consensus but where most group members are afraid to push their opinion much at all, a senior person will tweak that consensus, and at that point NOBODY CAN QUESTION IT. It is FINAL. You see that constantly. The Fukushima reactor decided to move the backup generators up to the hilltop to keep them safe from tsunami. Smart move! But the extension cords weren't available. So did they delay moving the generator? OMG NO, it was a FINAL DECISION THAT IT BE MOVED so they moved it despite literally every person in the reactor knowing that it would leave them with no power if the main generator stopped. So then later they were flying in supplies to the villages cut off by the radiation zones. A helicopter is hovering literally 1 meter off the ground while the ground crew is yelling at him that the airport is closed, therefore he cannot land, and that decision is FINAL and cannot be changed even to get drinking water to thirsty residents. Go back to the Tokaimura Incident, where the entire reactor staff knew certain steps involved mixing plutonium by hand in a god damned bucket. I am not kidding. Staff in a hurry tried to do a double-batch and pop went the weasel. The bucket part wasn't part of the decided procedure, but the decided procedure was basically missing a step and you couldn't make the reactor run without improvising that step. But the decision on the procedure was final, even though it was known to be dangerous.
I've also worked in Swiss companies in German and Canadian companies in English. Big companies aren't totally freewheeling and open to alternate opinions even in the West, but they're far more open than in Japan. Anyway, YES, Canon surely has some kind of plan, and you guys seem to think it must therefore be a great plan. But I know how these plans are cooked up and I don't share your confidence.
> this camera will be probably be a very nice solution with better high ISO
I mentioned elsewhere but my theory is that down-sampling a hi-MP camera, especially a back-side sensor, down to a lo-MP sensor's resolution, will give you approximately the same noise as that lo-MP sensor.
So rumor has it that the RP will be replaced by a downmarket camera and an upmarket camera that will also serve as an R replacement. Call it the RP+.
That said, is it too much to hope the RP+ will have this new 30.1 MP backside illuminated sensor? (Or something similar with the new tech?) That would be great. More DR and yes to IBIS. Still keep it reasonably compact.
Well the AF isn't as good in the A1 as in the R5/R6 anyway and resolution isn't everything.Bit let down. The Sony A1 is 50 MP and just as fast. I hope the AF really performs.
The R1 may well be a slower shooting high MP studio camera rather than a sports camera. So the right choice may depend on your type of photography.Now I'm thinking about selling my 1DX mkiii and picking up the R3 this summer but do I hold out for a R1...? It has to at least have specs this great.
I doubt the R1 will be anything other than an all out sports camera and if anything the resolution may be lower and the fps higher(say 20mp and 45fps for example), Canon will probably make a high resolution version of the R5 like the 5Ds and 5DsRThe R1 may well be a slower shooting high MP studio camera rather than a sports camera. So the right choice may depend on your type of photography.
Canon's own website says : "The first EOS series camera to feature a full frame, back illuminated, stacked CMOS sensor for high-speed readout, and DIGIC X for high-speed image processing. Combined to deliver 30 frames per second with AF/AE tracking when using the electronic shutter, and significantly reduced image warping."Is it stacked sensor? the description just mentions BSI.
- 30.1mp backside illuminated image sensor (A Canon first)
CR should fix the info....Canon's own website says : "The first EOS series camera to feature a full frame, back illuminated, stacked CMOS sensor for high-speed readout, and DIGIC X for high-speed image processing. Combined to deliver 30 frames per second with AF/AE tracking when using the electronic shutter, and significantly reduced image warping."
Why would Canon follow up a pro body sports camera with another one? Why would anyone need 45 fps? May as well use video.I doubt the R1 will be anything other than an all out sports camera and if anything the resolution may be lower and the fps higher(say 20mp and 45fps for example), Canon will probably make a high resolution version of the R5 like the 5Ds and 5DsR
You seem to be the one struggling with logic, but carry on.You really don't seem to understand how logic works.
When you say the 1DX3 does EVERYTHING better than the R, and I say you're full of it, I am not saying the 1DX3 does NOTHING better than the R. Instead I'm saying the 1DX3 does NOT do everything better than the R. I win that argument by even having ONE thing the R does better, and I think we've mentioned a half-dozen. Hell, you mentioned at least three for me.
How do you not know that the contrary of "everything" is "not everything?" Who told you the contrary of "everything" is "nothing?" How did an adult become an adult without understanding this? I'm honestly flummoxed. And I'm a little scared to think fellow citizens, fellow voters, actually don't even understand basic things like this.
I gave a list of quite a few ways the R beats a 1DX3. Where the heck do you get the idea "all I care about is MP?" (In point of fact my favorite benefit of the R is the RF lenses. If I could take just one superior ability, it'd be the lenses.)
Canon has made it clear that R3 is not their pro sports mirrorless camera so we can expect that will either be the R1 or R1x.The R1 may well be a slower shooting high MP studio camera rather than a sports camera. So the right choice may depend on your type of photography.
Everyone who orders one the first day will get one the first day it is shipped. Like everything ever.Availability will be a key question mark. The agencies and CPS members will likely get theirs first, the rest of us low lifes will have to wait.
Good old Tony Northrup doesn't think we'll see the R3 untill 2022, maybe even the second half. That sounds way too long a wait, may as well not announce it then. I believe late fall of this year is most likely.