Upvote
0
More thoughts on the Canon EOS R1 and EOS R5 Mark II from Paris
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
On the R3 I never was able to get the Eye Control system to work and I did not even bother trying with the R5 Mk2 since it is my understanding that the Eye Control hardware in the R5 Mk2 is identical to the R3. The only thing that has changed in my understanding is how many time the eye control processor reads the position of the eye. I believe it went from 30 Hz to 60 Hz.
The Eye Control on the forthcoming R1 is a different story since the hardware is also improved and Canon states that the R1 Eye Control works better for those of us that wear glasses. Obviously, it will still need to be tested.
Upvote
0
It is not really clear whether it fills the buffer or slows down.
Anyway, the inconsistent information is pretty frustrating.
My chart was from Canon USA.
Upvote
0
That was always going to happen.
The 5 series always outsells the 1 series.
Upvote
0
Can you please enlighten me and let me know what are the hardware differences in the Eye Control between the R3 and R5 Mk2? I know the R5 Mk2 has a faster refresh rate.
Upvote
0
True. From Canon Japan: "The newly developed optical system and gaze detection algorithm ensure stable gaze detection even if the photographer's eyes are not in the correct position or the photographer is wearing glasses."
However, the Eye Control on the R1 appears to have more significant changes. From Canon Japan: "Compared to the EOS R3, the EOS R1 has a higher pixel count and improved layout of the sensor, and more LED light sources. The gaze detection range has been expanded, improving detection stability when the eye position is misaligned or when wearing glasses. In addition, the detection frame rate has been improved to a maximum of approximately 60 fps, approximately double the maximum of approximately 30 fps for the EOS R3. It achieves both high accuracy and high tracking of changes in the gaze, achieving more stable detection and quick tracking of gaze movements."
Upvote
0
Quote from Jeff Cable's report:
"The Canon R3 had eye control (where the camera would track my pupil and focus on whomever I am looking at), but it did not work very well. Not only was it not accurate enough, but I hated the icon that would move around in the eyepiece distracting me from my work. I tried it for 30 minutes and turned it off for good. But that is all different with the Canon R1 and the Canon R5 Mark II. Now the eye control is incredibly accurate and there is an option to hide the icon."
Upvote
0
From the R5 Mk II (p)review on The Digital Picture: "The next iteration of Eye Control AF is back, again vastly improved with redesigned optics and a new algorithm increasing the detection rate by about 2x that of the R3."
See: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-R5-Mark-II.aspx#Autofocus
Upvote
0
Thanks for referencing the quote. I will have to give the Eye Control AF another test. My experiences with the R3 were eqivalent to Jeff Cable's experience and I never used it. WIth that said, if I could get the Eye Control AF to work for me it would be great.
Upvote
0
I have lot of trouble getting the cursor placed in the top third of screen, no issues at all with the bottom two thirds.
It does seem to get slightly better each time I try it, but I won’t enable it by default for now.
It does seem to get slightly better each time I try it, but I won’t enable it by default for now.
Upvote
0
Just thinking about the pre capture: my understanding is if it's turned on then for it to work you need to hold the shutter button at half press so if you're using back button focus then you can avoid having 15 shots every time you press the shutter simply by not holding the shutter at half press and only holding it at half press when you want the pre capture.
Be interested to see if this works or not
Last edited:
Upvote
0
A few people over at dpreview claim they are doing exactly that and that it works.
Upvote
0
I think the R1 is a good camera for its specific use cases (sports specifically). The target market of that specific use case is very narrow.
However, if even professionals inside that exact niche target market start preferring other cameras (R5 II) instead of their tailor made flagship (R1) in the exact use case it was designed for (olympic sports), then I do wonder whether the choice for a 24MPx sensor really was the best one.
Or, to state it differently, it would make a lot of sense (to me) to have a flagship body with a higher resolution as well, with the best AF and the best viewfinder and buffer all that. Maybe alongside the current R1. Clearly, even the pros find that they prefer that higher resolution, and they shouldn't have to compromise on the viewfinder, buffer, card slots etc.
However, if even professionals inside that exact niche target market start preferring other cameras (R5 II) instead of their tailor made flagship (R1) in the exact use case it was designed for (olympic sports), then I do wonder whether the choice for a 24MPx sensor really was the best one.
Or, to state it differently, it would make a lot of sense (to me) to have a flagship body with a higher resolution as well, with the best AF and the best viewfinder and buffer all that. Maybe alongside the current R1. Clearly, even the pros find that they prefer that higher resolution, and they shouldn't have to compromise on the viewfinder, buffer, card slots etc.
Upvote
0
Perhaps other possibilities with the R1, where the Smart Controller will also have half and full press functionality.
I hope it’s possible to use that where half press is one shot and full press starts servo tracking, and keep precapture as a half shutter press. We’ll see.
Upvote
0
I have never been more excited for a camera based on what I'm shooting most at this point in my life. I know someone in my hood that has been told by Canon that he may get one early (a month or so ahead), I'm looking forward to the potential hands on ahead of arrival.
This is probably the biggest advancement in 1 series cameras since I started shooting with them (1D Mark III). No, it's not an R3 Mark II.
Upvote
0
But it’s still 24 MP. Since MP is all that matters to anyone, the R1 really is just the R3 II. That has to be true, YouTube said so.
It makes sense, though, since the R3 was really going to be the R1 but Canon panicked and renamed it. This time they panicked the other way because they knew the 1D X III has reached its sell by date, so they took the R3 II they were about to launch and renamed it the R1.
Thank goodness for YouTube, without that the world just wouldn’t make sense.
Upvote
0
The narrative will change once it starts shipping and there's those affiliate dollars.. "I was wrong! The R3 is a turd!"
Upvote
0
The question is what do you think about the R1 is such a big advancement over the DSLR 1 series cameras that wasn't also true about the R3?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
