Update: The Canon EOS R3 will be officially announced on June 29th

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
941
789
www.flickr.com
Only Canon knows it's intent, but I think there are a few ways to look at that potential benefit to Canon by pushing people to switch. For instance, I suspect a lot of mirrorless buyers will end up re-buying lenses they already own in EF, resulting in greater lens sales than otherwise anticipated. Secondly, it may be a long term approach to maintaining customers. I think performing the autofocus on the sensor directly holds some clear opportunities and if Canon were to ignore mirrorless entirely, some people may become more likely to change brands in order to access those opportunities in the long run.

With respect to Canon only offering mirrorless to those who didn't want a DSLR, I'm not sure where Canon sees DSLRs in their future, but they have certainly put the vast majority of their effort into RF and relatively little into EF over the last while. They may indeed be pushing people to switch so they can move away from (or drastically reduce) DSLR production/development and there are certainly signs pointing that way. The last two DSLRs they released seem to be the 1DXIII and 850D in January and February of 2020, and plenty of camera lines appear to be either discontinued, behind on past release schedules, or nearing their typical renewal dates without any rumours of EF replacement. Further, the last EF lens releases were the 70-200 f/2.8 III and the 70-200 f/4 IS USM II in 2018; and several EF lenses have been rapidly discontinued, including one of the new EF 70-200's. None of that gives me a ton of confidence that a new batch of high-end DSLRs are coming from Canon. But hey, those sticking with DSLRs may yet be rewarded with extra cheap EF deals on the used market for a while so it's not all bad news!
Canon have said that they will continue to make DLSRs as long as people still want to buy them.
They are clearly filling out the RF product line with bodies and lenses. That is normal in a new market segment. 1 year without a new EF camera body is not that unusual given the current global circumstances.
Canon is offering a choice and people are migrating... and R5/6 sales are greater than Canon anticipated not to mention shortages for some RF lenses. They aren't pushing anyone anywhere.
In the main, RF lenses have additional benefits over their EF counterparts and in many cases there is no direct comparison.
EF lenses mostly work better on R mount bodies and you have the option of adapter CPL/ND filters as well.
We have never had so much choice :)
 

SwissFrank

from EOS 1N to R
Dec 9, 2018
615
349
Things are probably a lot more complicated than the above, however, does it mean that a higher MP sensor would have worst low light performance unless its technology, processing etc can sufficiently compensate?
Yes, as another reader pointed out, my model of white reflecting exactly 1 photo is a simplification. In the real world it'd be a Poisson distribution. However my demonstration of how averaging four coinflips together gives far less noise is exactly the same as averaging together four Poisson-distributed numbers.

No, the high-MP sensor needn't have extra technology to achieve this noise reduction via resolution reduction. You could do it later by simply rescaling the image in Photoshop. However, this technical issue is being discussed as it's key to my proposal that: if Canon cannot introduce bothe fast/lo-MP and slow/hi-MP cameras in close order, then it would have been preferable to introduce the slow/hi-MP body, not the fast/lo-MP body, because 1) this principle we're now discussing means the slow/hi-MP body can get identical noise results as the lo-MP body, if you down-sample to the same lo MP, and 2) if the slow/hi-MP body had some hardware support letting it produce raw files at that lo resolution so they could be read out of the sensor and stored on memory cards quickly.
 

exige24

EOS M6 Mark II
Jun 7, 2018
77
113
United States
I think we need to see both cameras side by side to determine plus / minus between the two systems. I would like to know if the R3 gave up a higher res sensor to achieve better overall capabilities at all settings in AF, high speed shooting, ISO performance, etc. For me, it is about the overall system vs one component. I have 40x60 prints from cropped 20mp 1dxII files that people seem to like. Maybe it’s just the subject. If the A1 can deliver equal or superior performance across all major functions without oddball limitations, your comment has merit. I definitely prefer the 1d/R3 body style over the A1 even if you add a grip. The other question you might ask - is the R3 competing with the A1, A9II or both? Canon has stated the R1 will be their flagship camera. The reviews and comparison in real life shooting should be interesting.

As you said about lenses, different strokes. I do this for fun and am fortunate my career paid for my hobby. I have been the full route with multiple iterations of the f2.8 trinity and big whites. I even had the original EF 600mm f4 L IS @14 lbs. Some times it is nice to move fast & light. Drop me a note when you hit 90 and let me know how it is working for you.I

Update:
Dpreview had a lot of good things to say about the A1, but here are a few of those trade offs I mentioned above. There may be other restriction.
  • Rear screen a bit small, low-res against similarly priced competitors
  • 30fps bursts only available in JPEG/HEIF/lossy compressed Raw
  • 30fps bursts are lens-dependent
  • High-res shot modes require desktop software to combine images; no motion correction yet available
  • EVF drops in resolution during C-AF, or if you choose high FPS modes (probably still great resolution)
  • Users must manually select between human, animal or birds for Eye AF
  • Battery life is just okay compared to other flagships
We will see if R3 has similar restrictions during high performance.

You're also forgetting about 8k without overheating. These are some major things. They are not, "But it's smaller and lighter and that's what I prefer!" characteristics. Not saying it's perfect at all these things or the best iterations of them, but it does have them and they're not broken. They are performed at a high level, albeit maybe not all at class leading levels. Regardless, as far as I'm concerned it is ALWAYS better to have the ability to do something even if I don't always use that capability then it is to remove it completely for low tier priorities, like weight or cost in top of the line products. Obviously within reason. The camera can't weight 20 lbs and cost $20000.

BTW Super telephotos are the only class of lens where the weight argument hold any legitimate merit. The difference between 14 and 8 pounds is not insignificant. The difference between 250g and 400g is and always will be. Lol
 

Danglin52

Wildlife Shooter
Aug 8, 2018
316
334
You're also forgetting about 8k without overheating. These are some major things. They are not, "But it's smaller and lighter and that's what I prefer!" characteristics. Not saying it's perfect at all these things or the best iterations of them, but it does have them and they're not broken. They are performed at a high level, albeit maybe not all at class leading levels. Regardless, as far as I'm concerned it is ALWAYS better to have the ability to do something even if I don't always use that capability then it is to remove it completely for low tier priorities, like weight or cost in top of the line products. Obviously within reason. The camera can't weight 20 lbs and cost $20000.

BTW Super telephotos are the only class of lens where the weight argument hold any legitimate merit. The difference between 14 and 8 pounds is not insignificant. The difference between 250g and 400g is and always will be. Lol
Not a big video guy, but hopefully the use of the 1d body style will provide heat management benefits for the R3. So far, the rumors are not touting 8k for the R3.

As to the view on weight, every ounce counts when putting a camera pack on an aggressive size / weight loss program. My standard pack fully loaded for Africa was a Gura Gura 32L that weighted in at 36lbs. "Mr Camera Bag" required his own seat on several camp flights due to weight limitations. The camera pack for my planned 2022 Africa trip is a Mindshift 26L @ roughly 21 lbs fully loaded. While 8 lbs of that reduction was related to eliminating the 200-400 f4 L IS w1.4x TC , it took fine tuning my needs / approach to eliminate an additional 7 lbs. The key drivers in eliminating the reaming weight included moving to mirrorless bodies (1 w/grip, 1 without), f4 lenses vs f2.8, lighter telephoto, lighter bag, etc. Did I trade off some capabilities, absolutely. Do I think they will make a critical difference, No. I am a very healthy 69 and didn't really have an issue with the heavier bag, but it is nice to have a smaller, lighter package to cart around. It may also save me money on future Africa trips so I don't have to buy a seat for "Mr Camera Bag". Funny fact, that was actually the name they used on the ticket.

Note: I did try the RF 800 DO f11, but I couldn't compromise that much. IQ wasn't bad, but I couldn't live with he f11.

As we have both said, different strokes.
 
Last edited:

exige24

EOS M6 Mark II
Jun 7, 2018
77
113
United States
Not a big video guy, but hopefully the use of the 1d body style will provide heat management benefits for the R3. So far, the rumors are not touting 8k for the R3.

As to the view on weight, every ounce counts when putting a camera pack on an aggressive size / weight loss program. My standard pack fully loaded for Africa was a Gura Gura 32L that weighted in at 36lbs. "Mr Camera Bag" required his own seat on several camp flights due to weight limitations. The camera pack for my planned 2022 Africa trip is a Mindshift 26L @ roughly 21 lbs fully loaded. While 8 lbs of that reduction was related to eliminating the 200-400 f4 L IS w1.4x TC , it took fine tuning my needs / approach to eliminate an additional 7 lbs. The key drivers in eliminating the reaming weight included moving to mirrorless bodies (1 w/grip, 1 without), f4 lenses vs f2.8, lighter telephoto, lighter bag, etc. Did I trade off some capabilities, absolutely. Do I think they will make a critical difference, No. I am a very healthy 69 and didn't really have an issue with the heavier bag, but it is nice to have a smaller, lighter package you don't have to cart around. It may also save me money on future Africa trips so I don't have to buy a seat for "Mr Camera Bag". Funny fact, that was actually the name they used on the ticket.

Note: I did try the RF 800 DO f11, but I couldn't make compromise that much. IQ wasn't bad, but I couldn't live with he f11.

As we have both said, different strokes.

Well said. I absolutely love the 800. It is specialized, but with good light, that reach and portability is so unique and just can't be beat.
 

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
455
566
Not a big video guy, but hopefully the use of the 1d body style will provide heat management benefits for the R3. So far, the rumors are not touting 8k for the R3.

As to the view on weight, every ounce counts when putting a camera pack on an aggressive size / weight loss program. My standard pack fully loaded for Africa was a Gura Gura 32L that weighted in at 36lbs. "Mr Camera Bag" required his own seat on several camp flights due to weight limitations. The camera pack for my planned 2022 Africa trip is a Mindshift 26L @ roughly 21 lbs fully loaded. While 8 lbs of that reduction was related to eliminating the 200-400 f4 L IS w1.4x TC , it took fine tuning my needs / approach to eliminate an additional 7 lbs. The key drivers in eliminating the reaming weight included moving to mirrorless bodies (1 w/grip, 1 without), f4 lenses vs f2.8, lighter telephoto, lighter bag, etc. Did I trade off some capabilities, absolutely. Do I think they will make a critical difference, No. I am a very healthy 69 and didn't really have an issue with the heavier bag, but it is nice to have a smaller, lighter package you don't have to cart around. It may also save me money on future Africa trips so I don't have to buy a seat for "Mr Camera Bag". Funny fact, that was actually the name they used on the ticket.

Note: I did try the RF 800 DO f11, but I couldn't make compromise that much. IQ wasn't bad, but I couldn't live with he f11.

As we have both said, different strokes.
I visited the website in your signature, and you have beautiful photos!

If you don't mind, I would really appreciate hearing more about what you brought in the 36lbs bag vs. what you are planning to bring in the 21lbs bag. Really curious to see where the weight savings are coming from and which lenses don't make the cut for your second round. I'm typically a "bring all of the gear I own" type of person when I travel, but with my lens collection growing and international weight restrictions so... restrictive... I will probably wind up making some tough choices on which equipment to leave behind on my next trips.
It would be great to hear about your thought process.

Thanks!
 

Danglin52

Wildlife Shooter
Aug 8, 2018
316
334
I visited the website in your signature, and you have beautiful photos!

If you don't mind, I would really appreciate hearing more about what you brought in the 36lbs bag vs. what you are planning to bring in the 21lbs bag. Really curious to see where the weight savings are coming from and which lenses don't make the cut for your second round. I'm typically a "bring all of the gear I own" type of person when I travel, but with my lens collection growing and international weight restrictions so... restrictive... I will probably wind up making some tough choices on which equipment to leave behind on my next trips.
It would be great to hear about your thought process.

Thanks!
Anglin Gear.jpg


Thank you for the nice comment on the photos. Hope this helps.

I did a presentation for a local photo club and this is the image I included to show my Africa setup. Half of the weight reduction came from eliminating the 200-400 (8lbs). IT was my favorite wildlife lens and one of the most versatile lenses on the planet when you consider it can be a 200-400 f4, 200-560 f5.6 w/flip of a switch, 400-800mm f8 with the 2x extnder and a 560-1120 with 1.4 engaged + the 2x (don't recommend unless you are desperate). As I looked at the new kit, I wanted to maintain as much of comparable body setup and the 24-800mm range with decent IQ even if I had to sacrifice some light sensitivity & boekah. In the end, I am at 24-700mm and gave up some light on various lenses. I am hoping that Canon will deliver some type of 500mm or 600mm f4 DO at some point and I will jump back into the big whites. I can rent if I have a trip where I want optimal IQ and not limited by weight restriction. I sold all my EF bodies and gear except the extenders. I would byy a RF 200-400/500 f4 in a heartbeat if they give it the EF III series weight loss program and reduce the weight to 6.5 lbs.

Here are the basic Changes (see picture below where I started:

Move to lighter bodies:
- 1dx II to R5 + grip (will be replaced by the R3 if specs hold)
- 1dx II battery charger - large and bulky, will probably have to add back with
- 5dIV to R5 Backup currently rented as needed, existing R5 will be the backup.
Move to lighter lenses
- EF 200-400 f4 to RF 100-500
- EF 100-400 Eliminated since I decided it was redundant. Can always rent a BW or other lens.
- EF 24-70 f2.8 L II to RF 24-105 f4 L IS
- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS II to RF 70-200 f4 L IS (was not in the bag above)
- EF 1.4x III & 2x III TC to RF 1.4x TC
Eliminated items
- Binocs, 8x monocular adequate since I only have vision in one eye.
- Macro tubes
- Other junk that wasn't needed.
- R batteries and chargers are lighter.
- Mindshift 26L is lighter than the Gura Gear 32L

To summarize, the new bag will include:
R3 & R5 without the grip
RF 24-105 f4 L IS
RF 70-200 f4 L IS (which may be left at home for some other Telephoto or to save weight)
RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 L IS*
RF 1.4x TC
RF-EF adaptor for emergencies, EF lenses are easier to find.

*If Canon releases a new 200-400/500 at 6-6.5lbs, the 100-500 will be left at home.


Note: I can't remember if some of the weight included the laptop, but I don't think it did. .
 
Last edited:

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,666
11,604
View attachment 198696

Thank you for the nice comment on the photos. Hope this helps.

I did a presentation for a local photo club and this is the image I included to show my Africa setup. Half of the weight reduction came from eliminating the 200-400 (8lbs). IT was my favorite wildlife lens and one of the most versatile lenses on the planet when you consider it can be a 200-400 f4, 200-560 f5.6 w/flip of a switch, 400-800mm f8 with the 2x extnder and a 560-1120 with 1.4 engaged + the 2x (don't recommend unless you are desperate). As I looked at the new kit, I wanted to maintain as much of comparable body setup and the 24-800mm range with decent IQ even if I had to sacrifice some light sensitivity & boekah. In the end, I am at 24-700mm and gave up some light on various lenses. I am hoping that Canon will deliver some type of 500mm or 600mm f4 DO at some point and I will jump back into the big whites. I can rent if I have a trip where I want optimal IQ and not limited by weight restriction. I sold all my EF bodies and gear except the extenders. I would byy a RF 200-400/500 f4 in a heartbeat if they give it the EF III series weight loss program and reduce the weight to 6.5 lbs.

Here are the basic Changes (see picture below where I started:

Move to lighter bodies:
- 1dx II to R5 + grip (will be replaced by the R3 if specs hold)
- 1dx II battery charger - large and bulky, will probably have to add back with
- 5dIV to R5 Backup currently rented as needed, existing R5 will be the backup.
Move to lighter lenses
- EF 200-400 f4 to RF 100-500
- EF 100-400 Eliminated since I decided it was redundant. Can always rent a BW or other lens.
- EF 24-70 f2.8 L II to RF 24-105 f4 L IS
- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS II to RF 70-200 f4 L IS (was not in the bag above)
- EF 1.4x III & 2x III TC to RF 1.4x TC
Eliminated items
- Binocs, 8x monocular adequate since I only have vision in one eye.
- Macro tubes
- Other junk that wasn't needed.
- R batteries and chargers are lighter.
- Mindshift 26L is lighter than the Gura Gear 32L

To summarize, the new bag will include:
R3 & R5 without the grip
RF 24-105 f4 L IS
RF 70-200 f4 L IS (which may be left at home for some other Telephoto or to save weight)
RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 L IS*
RF 1.4x TC
RF-EF adaptor for emergencies, EF lenses are easier to find.

*If Canon releases a new 200-400/500 at 6-6.5lbs, the 100-500 will be left at home.


Note: I can't remember if some of the weight included the laptop, but I don't think it did. .
Your new pack is basically what I settled on for our last few nature photo safari/holiday trips abroad. I always take a back-up of everything, which is helped because my wife joins in. Last precovid trips had us dropping the prime and taking two 100-400mm IIs, 2x 1.4xTCs, 5DIV, 5DSR, 2 chargers, 24-105, Olympus TG5, etc. When we come out of covid, it will be the R5, 100-500mm, RF 2x, which is my everyday gear. Then, for my wife there may be a change. She likes the 5DSR but for safer cross-compatibility in case both the 5DSR and the 100-500mm fail, I might get an R6 for her - a lightweight 70-400mm would clinch the second R series. OK, we don't get the quality of say a 600mm f/4 III but everything goes into hand luggage for even flights limited to 7kg, we can go on group trips in small vehicles without inconveniencing the others, hike with them, and have superb flexibility. Also, we take 8x binoculars, Swarovski 8x30 or 8x32 are very light and as bright as many 8x42.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr
Aug 7, 2018
353
305
Yesterday some videos popped up at Youtube that claim to show actual photos taken by the R3 and the Nikon Zfc, I am sure they must be spam and should be reported to Youtube. How could those sites with hardly any followers get their hands on cameras that are not on sale yet?
 

EOS 4 Life

EOS R
Sep 20, 2020
1,047
830
Yesterday some videos popped up at Youtube that claim to show actual photos taken by the R3 and the Nikon Zfc, I am sure they must be spam and should be reported to Youtube. How could those sites with hardly any followers get their hands on cameras that are not on sale yet?
That happens with every camera.
They show test footage of two cameras side by side and claim they are from the most anticipated cameras.
The Zfc is possible since there is plenty of footage that Nikon is just not allowing people to show but if they do not show themselves with the camera then it is safe to say they don't have it.
 

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
455
566
View attachment 198696

Thank you for the nice comment on the photos. Hope this helps.

I did a presentation for a local photo club and this is the image I included to show my Africa setup. Half of the weight reduction came from eliminating the 200-400 (8lbs). IT was my favorite wildlife lens and one of the most versatile lenses on the planet when you consider it can be a 200-400 f4, 200-560 f5.6 w/flip of a switch, 400-800mm f8 with the 2x extnder and a 560-1120 with 1.4 engaged + the 2x (don't recommend unless you are desperate). As I looked at the new kit, I wanted to maintain as much of comparable body setup and the 24-800mm range with decent IQ even if I had to sacrifice some light sensitivity & boekah. In the end, I am at 24-700mm and gave up some light on various lenses. I am hoping that Canon will deliver some type of 500mm or 600mm f4 DO at some point and I will jump back into the big whites. I can rent if I have a trip where I want optimal IQ and not limited by weight restriction. I sold all my EF bodies and gear except the extenders. I would byy a RF 200-400/500 f4 in a heartbeat if they give it the EF III series weight loss program and reduce the weight to 6.5 lbs.

Here are the basic Changes (see picture below where I started:

Move to lighter bodies:
- 1dx II to R5 + grip (will be replaced by the R3 if specs hold)
- 1dx II battery charger - large and bulky, will probably have to add back with
- 5dIV to R5 Backup currently rented as needed, existing R5 will be the backup.
Move to lighter lenses
- EF 200-400 f4 to RF 100-500
- EF 100-400 Eliminated since I decided it was redundant. Can always rent a BW or other lens.
- EF 24-70 f2.8 L II to RF 24-105 f4 L IS
- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS II to RF 70-200 f4 L IS (was not in the bag above)
- EF 1.4x III & 2x III TC to RF 1.4x TC
Eliminated items
- Binocs, 8x monocular adequate since I only have vision in one eye.
- Macro tubes
- Other junk that wasn't needed.
- R batteries and chargers are lighter.
- Mindshift 26L is lighter than the Gura Gear 32L

To summarize, the new bag will include:
R3 & R5 without the grip
RF 24-105 f4 L IS
RF 70-200 f4 L IS (which may be left at home for some other Telephoto or to save weight)
RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 L IS*
RF 1.4x TC
RF-EF adaptor for emergencies, EF lenses are easier to find.

*If Canon releases a new 200-400/500 at 6-6.5lbs, the 100-500 will be left at home.


Note: I can't remember if some of the weight included the laptop, but I don't think it did. .
Wow, thank you so much for taking the time to Post this! This was very detailed and helpful, and I am sure will benefit lots of people considering what gear to bring on future safaris!
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

Danglin52

Wildlife Shooter
Aug 8, 2018
316
334
Wow, thank you so much for taking the time to Post this! This was very detailed and helpful, and I am sure will benefit lots of people considering what gear to bring on future safaris!
Here is a photo of the new kit in a Mindshift 18L backpack (vs the 26L I would take to Africa). This is most of the gear mentioned in the previous post except for the second body (R3) which is represented by the R5 grip. You can either carry the gear with lens attached and ready to shoot or detached and protected by padded inserts. I usually detach all of my lenses for "travel mode". The R5 is on it's side attached to the RF 70-200 f4 L IS. When not attached, the 70-200 fits upright in the bag to save more space. One thing I did not mention was the Jupio dual charger for for LP-E6NH batteries (between the two lenses) - very flexible and works great in a small footprint. Main Gear - R5, R5 grip pretending to be the R3, RF 24-105 f4 L IS, RF 70-200 f4 L IS, RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 L IS, RF 1.4x TC, Leica 8x monocular, cards, batteries & charger - all in an 18L bag. I would definitely take the bigger bag for Africa just to have some extra room an gear. The 18L & 26L both have iPad/laptop holders in the front pockets. Nice change over the Gura Gear 32L. Not always possible, but I try to carry enough memory cards to avoid deleting images in the field.

I am keeping the GG 32L until I make sure they don't deliver a RF 200-500 f4 / 5.6 that changes my gear plans. Hopefully at 6.5 lbs vs. the EF 200-400 & 8 lbs.

Hope this helps.

R5 Kit 1.jpg
 
Last edited:

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
455
566
Here is a photo of the new kit in a Mindshift 18L backpack (vs the 26L I would take to Africa). This is most of the gear mentioned in the previous post except for the second body (R3) which is represented by the R5 grip. You can either carry the gear with lens attached and ready to shoot or detached and protected by padded inserts. I usually detach all of my lenses for "travel mode". The R5 is on it's side attached to the RF 70-200 f4 L IS. When not attached, the 70-200 fits upright in the bag to save more space. One thing I did not mention was the Jupio dual charger for for LP-E6NH batteries (between the two lenses) - very flexible and works great in a small footprint. Main Gear - R5, R5 grip pretending to be the R3, RF 24-105 f4 L IS, RF 70-200 f4 L IS, RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 L IS, RF 1.4x TC, Zeis 8x monocular, cards, batteries & charger - all in an 18L bag. I would definitely take the bigger bag for Africa just to have some extra room an gear. The 18L & 26L both have iPad/laptop holders in the front pockets. Nice change over the Gura Gear 32L. Not always possible, but I try to carry enough memory cards to avoid deleting images in the field.

Using the 26L would let me leave the 70-200 at home and maybe include some higher quality telephoto. I am keeping the GG 32L until I make sure they don't deliver a RF 200-500 f4 / 5.6 that changes my gear plans. Hopefully at 6.5 lbs ver the EF 200-400 & 8 lbs.

Hope this helps.
Yes, extremely helpful and much appreciated! I used to bring lots of SD cards on trips, and probably still will, but with CFExpress that becomes really expensive! I picked up a SanDisk Extreme PRO V2 2TB external SSD discounted to about $225 for Prime Day, which is about the same price as a 128GB CFExpress!

I really hope that rumored 200-500mm lens comes to be, especially if we can shave off several pounds!
 

peters

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
469
454
4k120 is great but does hit overheating limits quickly. That said, with 128GB cards, it only fits ~5 minutes of record time. More than enough for my requirements though.
In hot/summer indoor action shooting (>35C) over a couple of hours with continuous burst, my R5 did show the overheating lamp but of course the R5 didn't have any still shooting issues.

It sounds like you need an external recorder for your 4k60 and remove the cards to get longer record times. Can't use 4k120 externally though and Canon didn't include a IPB light option in the latest firmware :-(
Jeah, you are completely right. You have to use an external recorder to get 4k60 and you cant record internal. Meaning you have no backup at all and you have to rely on the external recorder - which got way more breaking points (wrong settings, second battery, cable...). Its just less reliable than internal recording. This makes the combination in my opinion for high quality event documentation (like weddings) where 4k60 is quite important pretty much useless. I personaly would not rely on that combination. My atomos works fine, but without a backup and with so much room for mistakes, I would not rely on it on a wedding.
And the only problem is the overheat. Its otherwise an excellent camera with great AF and options.
 

Danglin52

Wildlife Shooter
Aug 8, 2018
316
334
Not really as fast as it's 30fps is only compressed RAW , the A1 can only shoot 20fps RAW same as the R5
We will have to see the final specs, but I don't thing there will be many trade offs in the stills side of the camera. I don't know on the vide side, but I think whatever they deliver as the final spec will be robust without too many limitations. Canon took some lumps over the R5 and I think this they want a repeat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FrenchFry