What will Canon bring to the table with the EOS R1?

zim

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Oct 18, 2011
2,129
317
---

At around 5 watts consumption for the ARM Cortex A5 and another 10 watts for the RAM over 16 hours you are looking at about 35 Celcius to 45 Celcius (120 F) at the stainless steel plate side of things which is a tad warm but not overly so, assuming the plate was at least 2 cm by 2 cm and 5mm thick.

Canon can use the camera tripod mounting plate as the out-to-air heat dissipation item. Just make it 2x2 cm or 3cm by 3cm and at least 5mm to 1 cm thick using high nickel content stainless steel (i.e. I would use 316L Grade Stainless Steel which is very corrosion resistant and has HIGH HEAT transfer capability)

Attached to an internal set of heat sinks that combined thermal dissipation and tripod mounting plate would basically let the camera work for the 12 to 16 hour days typical of news reporters, sports photographers and documentary videographers. I could do a thermal analysis and get a full thermal profile in about 48 hours if I wanted to change say a 1Dx3 over to an R5 sensor and a more powerful Octo-core CPU!

V
I'm talking about low heat temperature burns from prolonged skin contact. Is that not a design constraint?
 

zim

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Oct 18, 2011
2,129
317
That's frowned upon ;)
I know its easy to joke this away but there is a bigger picture here imagine there is a poster that an admin takes a dislike too they change the posters words to insult or be abusive to ligitimise a ban. We trust that would never happen right?
Words matter.
 

privatebydesign

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,995
4,772
I know its easy to joke this away but there is a bigger picture here imagine there is a poster that an admin takes a dislike too they change the posters words to insult or be abusive to ligitimise a ban. We trust that would never happen right?
Words matter.
Sure they do but this site and ones like it are privately owned, there is no ‘right‘ for the users to be able to speak nor for there opinions to be accurately represented. We choose to be here and if we don’t like the way we are monitored or the way the site is run we can delete our posts and leave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,594
1,913
Hamburg, Germany
Sure they do but this site and ones like it are privately owned, there is no ‘right‘ for the users to be able to speak nor for there opinions to be accurately represented. We choose to be here and if we don’t like the way we are monitored or the way the site is run we can delete our posts and leave.
Nonetheless, we can also express our opinions about a situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

adrian_bacon

EOS M6 Mark II
Aug 12, 2020
69
70
I have both the R6 and R5, and have the extender grip for both. That makes it very much like the 1D series.

Quad pixel AF would be nice, and use it for dual or quad gain output to significantly boost the dynamic range in addition to better autofocus.

For a flagship pro sports shooter camera, I'm not sure 45mp is really what those guys want, but at the same time, 20MP isn't enough either. I'd like to see at least 24MP though, with the ability to record the full 6K raw. If Canon really wants to do a full 8K+ flagship R1 series, then they really need to bring the performance. As it is, for stills, the R6 is basically a mirrorless 1DX Mark III.
 

adrian_bacon

EOS M6 Mark II
Aug 12, 2020
69
70
So I can tell you right now, as much as I want a massive resolution increase over the current 1DXIII, it will prevent many photographers from buying it. Unless Canon comes out with a better alternative to cRAW and allows us to shoot in smaller, more preferred resolutions, I and many others will struggle to justify making this our $6,000+ camera in the bag.

Why?

I was one of the first photographers in "my little slice" of the publishing industry that bought the R5. Several friends waited for my results before they pulled the trigger themselves and many of them shared my same criticism - 'I don't need 45mp to cover a race/event/wedding/real estate, etc.' I was quick to identify this and purchased the R6 to partner with my R5. Weddings in particular don't benefit from 45mp, it's more of a burden than anything else. At least in motorsports photography I can use that resolution for additional flexibility for cropping, in print or advertisement...but there is zero value in a 8192 x 5464 pixel dancefloor shot or cake cutting, so I lean on the R6 after the portrait session has concluded.

This is something many of us identify as a shortcoming of the R5 and it's rather upsetting. I hope that Canon reconsiders the importance of cRAW and can bring back an mRAW format that keeps things in the 12-15 and 20-26mp sweet spots. The argument of always shooting at the maximum resolution isn't exactly true for all of us. When I cover events I can shoot thousands of images a day for 3-4 days at a time and have to turn those around same day...and I still want the benefits of RAW, just not the resolution or file size. Yes, cRAW is roughly the size of a standard 20mp RAW out of the R6, but those images do NOT process easily in software like 20mp, as it chugs along to read the 45mp file format, versus blazing through a normal CR2/CR3 RAW...not sure why, but please give us back smaller RAW.

I have to totally agree with this, as it's exactly what I've done. I have the R5 for when I need/want the higher resolution, but the rest of the time, it's the R6. Wayyy smaller files and way faster turnaround.
 

HarryFilm

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2016
705
166
The forum is d.o.o.m.e.d :LOL:

Seriously though, altering peoples 'words' without any sort of marker or disclaimer is a pretty sh!tty move in my opinion.

Edit: Wow, even putting spaces in between is not enough! :mad: It got changed to 'the greatest'. If there has to be censorship, at least mark it as such, instead of secretly changing the opinion people are expressing into the opposite!

Canon is DOOOOOOOOOOOMED !!!!!!!!!

V
 

HarryFilm

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2016
705
166
I'm talking about low heat temperature burns from prolonged skin contact. Is that not a design constraint?

--

In North America, UL (Underwriters Laboratories) and CSA (Canadian Standards Association) would normally take a look to see if the operation of a camera would cause a big hazard and either label said item a true hazard requiring engineering changes OR they would suggest specific warnings.

In my opinion, adding a simple removable silicone rubber cover with tiny holes in it to a heat dissipation plate that is part of the camera/tripod mount system would be a VIABLE SOLUTION to heat removal issues.

When mounted to a tripod, the plate would act as designed removing heat to the atmosphere via simple thermal radiation. With a silicone rubber cover on, the user can handle the camera as normal with only a general warning to users needed.

35 to 45 Celcius is definitely doable in a consumer product IF the rubber cover was installed for handheld use OR a secondary heat plate guard that had extra space between it and the user was installed. I do believe MOST USERS would move their hands out of the way as temps on the heat dissipation plates got to 35+ Celcius so I don't see that as being a huge safety issue.

V
 

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,078
1,687
Kentucky, USA
--

In North America, UL (Underwriters Laboratories) and CSA (Canadian Standards Association) would normally take a look to see if the operation of a camera would cause a big hazard and either label said item a true hazard requiring engineering changes OR they would suggest specific warnings.

In my opinion, adding a simple removable silicone rubber cover with tiny holes in it to a heat dissipation plate that is part of the camera/tripod mount system would be a VIABLE SOLUTION to heat removal issues.

When mounted to a tripod, the plate would act as designed removing heat to the atmosphere via simple thermal radiation. With a silicone rubber cover on, the user can handle the camera as normal with only a general warning to users needed.

35 to 45 Celcius is definitely doable in a consumer product IF the rubber cover was installed for handheld use OR a secondary heat plate guard that had extra space between it and the user was installed. I do believe MOST USERS would move their hands out of the way as temps on the heat dissipation plates got to 35+ Celcius so I don't see that as being a huge safety issue.

V
It's interesting to see your thoughtful post, Harry. But I don't think that you can rely on any camera to be put on a tripod in order to disapate enough heat to make it a needed element to cool an otherwise too-warm camera. The reason is that it will often not be put on a tripod and then you are back to square 1. Canon could have routed their inner R5 heat sink metal strips to the tripod socket, but to my recollection the lensrentals teardown indicated that they did not bother to do so.

I previously suggested that Canon consider a small portion of one or more camera sides to contain a small hollow channel or channels through a non-corrosive heat conducting metal heat pipe to allow air to rise from the bottom to the top of the camera, dissipating heat naturally without need of a fan. It would be designed to allow moisture, or rain, to enter into it which would further cool the camera and there would be no way that moisture/water could enter any other region of the camera as is it totally enclosed within the heat pipe(s). The hole(s) on bottom & top could be quite small and almost unnoticeable.

Canon could even take this one step further and design the outer side walls to be a non-corrosive heat conducting metal design with continuous columns of small hollow channels allowing air to rise from small holes on the bottom to small holes in the top of the metal sides, almost unnoticeable. Of course the metal sides could still have a normal rubberized skin attached for normal ergonomic in-hand feel.

What do you think of this? If it has merit, then I'd be interested in your thoughts of how a possible design could be created and submitted to Canon. I don't have the ability to do this, but you probably do if you're interested.
 
Last edited:

gavinz

I'm New Here
Aug 13, 2020
12
15
Quad pixel AF + global shutter. 4k res. The global shutter will be the killer functionality and finally get rid of the mechanical shutter.
 

Surab

Olympus OM-D E-M5II
Aug 22, 2020
45
57
I mean the biggest feature of the A1 far and above is the electronic shutter that enables 1/200 s flash sync. That e shutter is the main draw.

But as long as the R1 can replicate or improve upon that (we all hope for a global shutter) then I would say that Canon is not *******.
 

Surab

Olympus OM-D E-M5II
Aug 22, 2020
45
57
I mean the biggest feature of the A1 far and above is the electronic shutter that enables 1/200 s flash sync. That e shutter is the main draw.

But as long as the R1 can replicate or improve upon that (we all hope for a global shutter) then I would say that Canon is not the best.

Hmmm. I meant to say they are not dooooooomed..... Well done. I will leave it the way the script has changed it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules

David - Sydney

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
680
563
www.flickr.com
What do you think of the size of a 1 series grip larger than the R5 yet smaller than the DSLR 1's? That's how I envision the body size of a mirrorless 1 series. Dual orientation, larger battery, moderate mp's (30+ but not over 45) tough as nails with more than 500k+ shutter actuations.
No need for a shutter to fail if there is no mechanical shutter ie if they implement a global shutter
 

AJ

EOS RP
Sep 11, 2010
704
120
I think short battery life for MILC is *******.
That, and the R1 will have quad-pixel AF.
 
<-- start Taboola -->