We haven’t forgotten about the Canon EOS R1, and you probably haven’t either [CR2]

DBounce

Canon Eos R3
May 3, 2016
475
519
He did not equivocate, but stated clearly:


It takes quite a bit of hubris to think that simply because you own a product you are the "target audience." I could buy a Corvette or a mini-van, but in neither case would I assume that I am the "target audience."

I simply pointed out that his wish list was not reflective of all other R3 owners.
“As an owner of an R3”… meaning: R3 owners are the target audience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
6,947
5,089
69
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
“As an owner of an R3”… meaning: R3 owners are the target audience.
But are they? We don't really know what the target audience of the R1 is. Seems unlikely though that Canon thinks that even a majority of people who bought the R3 will turn around and immediately buy the R1.

Perhaps you only meant to share your "wish list" of what you personally would like in an R1. Nothing wrong with that, but it would have saved you some criticism, not only from me but from a number of others on this forum, if you had been more clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,323
1,610
UK
After the R5, R5 C, and R3, Canon did not leave much room for an R1.
It will be basically for the people who are not satisfied with those 3.
The R3 is more than sufficient to fulfil the needs of most professionals. But manufacturers are always striving to provide more. So what are the few remaining areas where improvements would be beneficial, and where does that leave the R1?

More MP? - possibly, but that will only be useful if there are also options to shoot uncompressed RAW at lower resolutions, as 24-30MP is enough for 90% of images.
Global shutter? - possibly, but ultra fast readouts would reduce rolling shutter to the level where it became virtually undetectable, so global shutter may not be necessary.
8K? - probably, and that would need more MP than the R3 has.
Greater durability? - possibly, suggesting the possibility of dispensing with mechanical shutter.
Faster burst speeds? - possibly, but the R3 is already pretty damn fast.
Better eye-controlled AF - definitely, as the R3 is less than perfect in this regard.
Better AF tracking - almost certainly there are advances to be made in subject recognition, AF acquisition and tracking.
Better EVF - definitely, higher resolution, more natural rendition, and reduced lag time are all needed.
Faster file transmission - definitely and of increasing importance to pros competing to get images to the media rapidly.
Pre-capture? - definitely, sports, wildlife and reportage photographers all want pre-capture, but it requires a powerful processor, a huge buffer, and very fast readouts.
AI? - possibly, AI could be used to increase resolution, DR and sharpness, and to reduce noise and motion blur, all of which could be baked into the original image.

The next question, is how much extra, over and above the R3 price, would buyers be prepared to pay?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
6,947
5,089
69
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
The R3 is more than sufficient to fulfil the needs of most professionals. But manufacturers are always striving to provide more. So what are the few remaining areas where improvements would be beneficial, and where does that leave the R1?

More MP? - possibly, but that will only be useful if there are also options to shoot uncompressed RAW at lower resolutions, as 24-30MP is enough for 90% of images.
Global shutter? - possibly, but ultra fast readouts would reduce rolling shutter to the level where it became virtually undetectable, so global shutter may not be necessary.
8K? - probably, and that would need more MP than the R3 has.
Greater durability? - possibly, suggesting the possibility of dispensing with mechanical shutter.
Faster burst speeds? - possibly, but the R3 is already pretty damn fast.
Better eye-controlled AF - definitely, as the R3 is less than perfect in this regard.
Better AF tracking - almost certainly there are advances to be made in subject recognition, AF acquisition and tracking.
Better EVF - definitely, higher resolution, more natural rendition, and reduced lag time are all needed.
Faster file transmission - definitely and of increasing importance to pros competing to get images to the media rapidly.
Pre-capture? - definitely, sports, wildlife and reportage photographers all want pre-capture, but it requires a powerful processor, a huge buffer, and very fast readouts.
AI? - possibly, AI could be used to increase resolution, DR and sharpness, and to reduce noise and motion blur, all of which could be baked into the original image.

The next question, is how much extra, over and above the R3 price, would buyers be prepared to pay?
That's a good list. A couple of comments.
More MP? - possibly, but that will only be useful if there are also options to shoot uncompressed RAW at lower resolutions, as 24-30MP is enough for 90% of images.
Why uncompressed raw? Having shot a lot of compressed raw under a lot of different conditions and having seen no real world disadvantages, I don't see why there would be a problem with shooting a higher resolution file as C-raw to save time and space. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Canon were to make C-raw the default raw option for high megapixel bodies.

Definitely agree with Better eye-controlled AF and Better AF tracking. Eye-controlled autofocus on the R3 really isn't ready for prime time. Autofocus tracking can always be improved. One area much in need of improvement is to have the tracking do a better job of locking onto an individual subject and staying there. A lot of the You Tube "experts" will "test" autofocus by tracking a single subject. That's a joke. Autofocus won't be there until you can pick out a single player in a group and lock on that subject even as others come into the scene.

As far as Faster file transmission goes, I think the bigger need is a user friendly interface that allows the photographer to quickly select a single image, give it some basic processing and cropping and seamlessly post that photo to social media, all without needing a second device. Not all photographers have the support mechanism that professional and NCAA photographers have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,323
1,610
UK
That's a good list. A couple of comments.

Why uncompressed raw? Having shot a lot of compressed raw under a lot of different conditions and having seen no real world disadvantages, I don't see why there would be a problem with shooting a higher resolution file as C-raw to save time and space. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Canon were to make C-raw the default raw option for high megapixel bodies.
To be honest I haven't really done any serious comparisons between RAW and C-RAW, as to make valid comparisons it would be necessary to simultaneously shoot RAW and C-RAW images and deliberately underexpose/overexpose to check shadow/highlight retention, colour gamut and noise levels. I do however notice a significant difference between C-RAW and JPEG, with the latter producing undesirable compression-related artefacts and a more "plasticky" rendition. Currently I'm shooting almost everything on C-RAW.

But even C-RAW uses a lot of memory and reduces buffer when shooting a series of hi-speed bursts, so I'd like to see options to shoot at lower resolution RAWs/C-RAWs, e.g. 90MP, 45MP and 22.5MP.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

David - Sydney

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,544
1,308
www.flickr.com
Actually I love the fact that vertical videos became a thing.
It is fascinating to see the reaction for he DJI mini 3 pro's option to shoot vertical/portait by rotating the lens assembly. No loss of pixels due to cropping a landscape orientation photo/video. Some video purists can't abide by vertical videos but they fit Facebook/Insta/TikTok scrolling well.
For stills photography, a portrait orientation gives more pixels for multi-shot panoramas as well.
A simple but useful feature :)
 
Upvote 0

David - Sydney

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,544
1,308
www.flickr.com
My main problem with the subscription model is that if you end sour subscription, you lose access to the software after having spend hundreds of dollars over the years. A fair deal would be if you could keep the current version (without any new updates) after two or three years of subscription. Or at least that you then get the option to keep the software for a one time fee of $50 or so. The same odel that is used for leasing a car. You lease a car for some time and in the end you can buy the car for a small sum. Then it is your car forever.

Adobe may come with a lot of useful updates, but firstly I do not like updates anyway unless I really need them and secondly the incentive for Adobe would be much higher if they always had to come with new features to make you keep your subscription. At the current model you have to keep your subscription even without any update. Otherwise you lose access to the software.
Please note that LR adds a sidecar file with your raw/jpg/heif file. It doesn't modify the original file so you never "lose" access to your photos and can import into any editor you prefer - in parallel if you like. PSD files are a different story of course so if you prefer them, also export a final edited photo.

If you have edited in LR and then cease to subscribe to LR anymore then:
- You can continue to use Lightroom Classic excluding the Develop module, Map module and mobile sync ie you can export jgp/etc with changes at any time. I believe that you can still use it to organise your files ie the catalogue features
- Your LR Cloud content will be deleted. I don't use their cloud storage as I store locally (with backup multiple ways) but some may.

For me, it was a simple decision. I used to update LR every 2 years but rolling that into a subscription was about the same cost but bundled PS as well. Yes, Adobe can jack up the prices at any time and exchange rate changes against USD can also affect local pricing. They will never reduce the price but would seek to limit any increases to avoid backlash. Their perpetual licenses would also change price over time as well.

Subscription models give stable cash flows which help fund R&D rather then larger one-time sales which can be subject to prevailing macro economic conditions.

Lastly, updates also include bug fixes and most importantly - security fixes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

David - Sydney

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
1,544
1,308
www.flickr.com
For the car analogy, Tesla charges a monthly subscription for autonomous driving. They have also limited their free standard connectivity access to 8 years (in the US) for maps etc as they don't accept carplayAndroid Auto. They will probably force older owners to subscribe to their premium connectivity package after that. I can see where their ongoing costs are and it isn't like heated seats where the hardware is already installed.

I also wish that other cars had cooling seats like Lexus does for warmer countries. That said, Lexus charges AUD300 for one-time updated navigation maps which is absurd!
 
Upvote 0

lustyd

EOS M6 Mark II
May 4, 2022
99
140
That is one of the reasons why I hate video in general. The aspect ratio of 16:9 is just nonsense. What was wrong with 4:3 for example? Movies are mostly about humans and human are taller than wide. The same is true for skyscrapers, trees, a bottle of beer and many other things. Usually the sides of a video are filled with unimportant stuff anyway.
While your points are great for stills, video works differently. If you want to show an imposing skyscraper the best* way to do it is with a widescreen aspect and a tilt shot, allowing the viewer to gradually understand the height of the building as the shot develops. Photo is about framing, video is about story and the time aspect is important. A tilt shot of that one massive tree can also be used to show that the surrounding trees are so much smaller. A single tree could also be emphasized with a zoom dolly shot where background movement would be important, so the widescreen is again very useful. A bottle of beer might be best with a GoPro attached, showing the background as the drinker lifts it, or with a GoPro on the drinker's chest showing the bottle rising to their mouth. Or even a Snorri-cam shot of their head, making the background move about wildly as you see them drinking, giving a drunk effect. We're not trying to frame the bottle in video, we're trying to tell the story of the bottle and what's happening to and around it. Unless you're shooting an ad, then it's a bottle with probably some snow behind it and a drop of condensation dripping down the side...

*edited to say that best is probably a bad word here. Maybe default/easy/standard/way students are taught
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
78
54
After the R5, R5 C, and R3, Canon did not leave much room for an R1.
It will be basically for the people who are not satisfied with those 3.
ACtually, I'm thinking the R1 MIGHT have the super-sensor they patented a couple years ago that can do global shutter, electronic ND, and double dynamic range. In other words something that's changes the game in a way other than mere MP or build quality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

john1970

EOS R3
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
556
714
Northeastern US
It is impossible to predict with absolute certainty what features the R1 will have, but some features I would like include:

1) Metering link to AF point similar to all other 1 series camera
2) Cross-type AF points in the sensor to improve AF precision
3) Dual CF-Express type B slots
4) A sensor that can acquire lossless RAW images at multiple resolutions like the Leica M11.

Definitely looking forward to the R1, but it will likely be another year before we have any definitive specs. I anticipate a development announcement in early Q2 2023.
 
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,323
1,610
UK
I don't do stupid things like instagrams, FB tic tok or other such silly things.
I have a life in the real world.
That's a bit harsh. I loathe twitter, facebook, instagram etc, but I know plenty of people who most definitely lead very fulfilling lives in the "real world", and still find enjoyment posting images on Flickr.

Also, I have to ask - if you are only interested in the "real world", why are you spending time posting on social media yourself? (CR is social media, in case you hadn't noticed).
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
1,925
2,286
While your points are great for stills, video works differently. If you want to show an imposing skyscraper the best* way to do it is with a widescreen aspect and a tilt shot, allowing the viewer to gradually understand the height of the building as the shot develops. Photo is about framing, video is about story and the time aspect is important. A tilt shot of that one massive tree can also be used to show that the surrounding trees are so much smaller. A single tree could also be emphasized with a zoom dolly shot where background movement would be important, so the widescreen is again very useful. A bottle of beer might be best with a GoPro attached, showing the background as the drinker lifts it, or with a GoPro on the drinker's chest showing the bottle rising to their mouth. Or even a Snorri-cam shot of their head, making the background move about wildly as you see them drinking, giving a drunk effect. We're not trying to frame the bottle in video, we're trying to tell the story of the bottle and what's happening to and around it. Unless you're shooting an ad, then it's a bottle with probably some snow behind it and a drop of condensation dripping down the side...

*edited to say that best is probably a bad word here. Maybe default/easy/standard/way students are taught
Interesting comment and point of view.
Convincing!
 
Upvote 0

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
2,381
2,506
The Netherlands
It is impossible to predict with absolute certainty what features the R1 will have, but some features I would like include:
[..]
4) A sensor that can acquire lossless RAW images at multiple resolutions like the Leica M11.
[..]
A lower resolution image is per definition neither lossless nor RAW. Unless it's a crop, in that case it can be RAW.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

masterpix

EOS RP
Jun 29, 2016
355
265
I think Canon being almost two years behind (3 by the time this canera is supposedly available) is forcing their hand to put out a super high mpx sensor. They would have done better just putting a better sensor in the R3 which is perfect ergonomically but lacking in a modern day sensor size and releasing it sooner. Then they could work on a bigger sensor for the MK II. They are way behind with a flagship model already and I'm guessing that drove them to the idea of being mpx king. Personally, I think 50-60 mpx is the sweet spot. Guess we still have to wait another half a year to find out.
One will debate what is the "best" sensor size, on one hand, most people post things on the internet, or their computer screen which is in best 8K (2400*3600 pixels)? Thus asking why need for 50-60mpx while they can only see a fraction of it. Then you will say "crop", but again does one need to crop or just get closet to the object and fill the frame with the object, not copping it? Higher mpx means lower dynamic range, much more sensitivity to movements etc. I have a friend with the R6, I have the R5, and to be honest, for most pictures, there is no real difference between our pictures when we post them online. For sports and action photographers, speed of "action" is more important then higher mpx. the R1 is made for those people, not those taking higher mpx shots that needs lesser speed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0