Canon EOS R1 Images and Specifications

#141
Quack said:
So, the Nikon z9 is an all-in-one, but the R5, and now the R5 II is not? Sorry, that makes no sense at all.
Click to expand...
R5II is another thing on which I'm holding on pre-order.

But here is the talk about R1 with all its features.

Quack said:
Seems like the R1 has some game changers for sports shooters.
You can register a specific person and the camera will keep AF on that person.
AF that will automatically follow a ball from one individual to another in basketball, volleyball and soccer.
Eye AF is apparently much better.
Click to expand...
Well IF it works it will be a nice add-on - but is it really a game changer? Are you a sports shooter? Do you know how actually tracking a player or a rider already works?
Quack said:
And proper studio gear needs to be Sony or Fuji? Please, you just lost all credibility with that statement.
Click to expand...
Apparently, you're neither a sport shooter nor a studio user - just a fanboy. But I'll give you a free lesson - nowadays for commercial work you either go with GFX or rV. Thank me later.

Richard CR said:
Action and person priority.
Click to expand...
You really put trust in this feature. I mean, if it will work flawlessly - I admit - it will be something new. But judging from different observations throughout the years it will be some kind of facilitation for less experienced shooters rather than new field for the pros. I don't want to be grumpy, but for example - was EyeAF really a game changer? At least, in a way how it works in R3. Not really. Rather a nice gimmick which sometimes helps a bit but isn't actually dead on reliable.
 
Upvote 0
#142
Arude said:
But here is the talk about R1 with all its features.

Well IF it works it will be a nice add-on - but is it really a game changer? Are you a sports shooter? Do you know how actually tracking a player or a rider already works?

Apparently, you're neither a sport shooter nor a studio user - just a fanboy. But I'll give you a free lesson - nowadays for commercial work you either go with GFX or rV. Thank me later.
Click to expand...
Fuji sells at most about 15,000 GFX bodies per year. Canon has stated they will produce 45,000 R1 bodies per year, and they've just admitted that people who want them won't get them immediately because that's not enough to meet initial demand.

What that says is that the market for a 24 MP action-focused body is much larger than for a 100 MP studio/landscape-focused body, and also that the R1 is already a success among its target audience. What that implies is that your complaints are irrelevant. You won't thank me later, but I don't care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#143
Quack said:
So, the Nikon z9 is an all-in-one, but the R5, and now the R5 II is not? Sorry, that makes no sense at all.

Seems like the R1 has some game changers for sports shooters.
You can register a specific person and the camera will keep AF on that person.
AF that will automatically follow a ball from one individual to another in basketball, volleyball and soccer.
Eye AF is apparently much better.

As is usual with these types of posts, you assume incorrectly that the R1 is meant for owners of the R3, thus it must be significantly better than the R3. No, it does not, as Canon obviously knows many R3 owners will have no need to buy an R1 now. The R1 is aimed at 1 series DSLR owners and to some degree owners of 5 and 6 series cameras looking to upgrade.

And proper studio gear needs to be Sony or Fuji? Please, you just lost all credibility with that statement.
Click to expand...
Amazing how people think, isn't it?
 
Upvote 0
#144
Honest question: Why are flagship cameras even geared towards the sports photographer niche? Is it the best paid part of photography?

It sure does not seem to be the most demanding one. There are predestined photographer booths, you have a pretty good idea what will be going on, there is a strictly defined area where things happen.

I would imagine that the guy hiking for hours or even days to capture a nice view only to be greeted by bad conditions has a harder job. Or the warzone journalist who runs into a very real chance to be killed. Etc etc.

To me it seems that these guys would profit from a R5 style body, with the same ruggedness as R1 body, same AF as R1 but trading some of the FPS for more resolution. Or is it simply because of the inbuilt grip: Bigger must be better so our biggest camera is our flagship.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#145
Anon said:
Honest question: Why are flagship cameras even geared towards the sports photographer niche? Is it the best paid part of photography?

It sure does not seem to be the most demanding one. There are predestined photographer booths, you have a pretty good idea what will be going on, there is a strictly defined area where things happen.

I would imagine that the guy hiking for hours or even days to capture a nice view only to be greeted by bad conditions has a harder job. Or the warzone journalist who runs into a very real chance to be killed. Etc etc.

To me it seems that these guys would profit from a R5 style body, with the same ruggedness as R1 body, same AF as R1 but trading some of the FPS for more resolution. Or is it simply because of the inbuilt grip: Bigger must be better so our biggest camera is our flagship.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's geared primarily towards the sports guys at all, though some of them think it is designed just for them. It's appeal has to be more broad to be viable. Photojournalists (includes sports guys/gals), adventurers, wildlife, guys who fetishize gear, and yes, well heeled posers. It's an incredible camera. For some, it's just bling. For others, a tool. For others, a great camera for their hobby.

Years ago I sold cars for Dodge. It was a very urban area (Southern California) There were always guys that came in demanding a 4x4 Ram truck. I'd always ask, "Oh, your an off-roader?" 99% of the time the answer amounted to, "Never have, and I'd never take a new truck off-road. It's just cool." Never underestimate the motivation of wealthy posers looking for more trophies.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#146
frankchn said:
Yeah, of course no one sane will shoot 120 fps all the time and end up with 100k photos.

However, (and I've posted about this elsewhere) when I shot college sports for the student newspaper, my editor always wanted ball on bat/racket/paddle photos of specific players. 120 fps + precapture will make this particular assignment trivial.

Sorting it is relatively easy too -- just scroll to look for the moment the ball comes into contact, star that one, delete the rest of the sequence. The batter swung and missed? Don't even bother downloading it to a computer, just trash the entire sequence right on the camera.
Click to expand...
I suppose if you want a very specific shot and to hell with anything else. Yep. No doubt it will make your life very very easy.
 
Upvote 0
#147
Aussie shooter said:
I suppose if you want a very specific shot and to hell with anything else. Yep. No doubt it will make your life very very easy.
Click to expand...
I can make a camera that goes 120 fps go slower, I can’t make a 20 fps camera go faster.

We pay $6000+ for the cameras to make our lives easier one way or the other -- whether it is for 120 fps when we need it, or for best-in-class AF or special AF features like the R1's scene recognition.

If I didn't care about making my life easier, I would shoot sports with a film camera without autofocus and a manual film advance -- that would be hard.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#151
Anon said:
Honest question: Why are flagship cameras even geared towards the sports photographer niche? Is it the best paid part of photography?

It sure does not seem to be the most demanding one.
Click to expand...
Which other types of photography do you need to get production ready photos out in an instant without missing a moment?
I can't say that there are not more demanding types of photography out there but there can't be very many.
 
Upvote 0
#152
Ozarker said:
I don't think it's geared primarily towards the sports guys at all, though some of them think it is designed just for them.
Click to expand...
I find it strange that 24 MP was seen as good all around but now it is just for "sports".
I understand that a lot of people need more than 24 MP.
I also understand that a lot of people do not.
Canon does sell a lot of R6 II and R50 cameras.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#153
EOS 4 Life said:
I find it strange that 24 MP was seen as good all around but now it is just for "sports".
I understand that a lot of people need more than 24 MP.
I also understand that a lot of people do not.
Canon does sell a lot of R6 II and R50 cameras.
Click to expand...
I'd be fine with 24mp if I didn't suck at composition in the heat of the moment.:p
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#154
neuroanatomist said:
Honest answer, it doesn’t matter in the real world. The target market comprises owners of Canon 1-series and other high end bodies. I guess you believe the internet implication that comparing cameras across brands is relevant because people switch brands all the time. The data show otherwise. Brand switching occurs mainly with entry level cameras. Canon knows this, even if you don’t.
Click to expand...

In the past that was more the case.

In the present the decision makers regarding which cameras to buy (or even lease) for the typical news/sports agencies are more likely to be corporate types with MBAs who are more impressed with spec sheets and discounts than senior photo editors who were once field photographers and more impressed with real world camera usability and output. The C-suite crowd at AP, Reuters, etc. have all been convinced by Sony's marketers that they're the better option. Even freelancers who want to submit work to some of their divisions must now use Sony gear.
 
Upvote 0
#156
Ozarker said:
They miss shots too. Humans.
Click to expand...

The difference between the top pros and the wannabes is in what percentage they hit and miss.

It's not much difference from baseball. Hit .225 and you'll toil a few years in the minor leagues before having to find another way to earn a living. Hit .255 and you'll get a chance at some point to show what you've got in the show. Hit .285 in the majors for a decade or more and you're probably in the Hall of Fame. Hit .315 or better for your MLB career and you'll be mentioned in the short list for best [insert defensive position here] of all time.


The likes of Neil Leifer and Walter Ioss, Jr. hit a lot more consistently than even Ted Williams. And that was with slow film and slow cameras that were considered blazing fast if they had a 3 fps motor winder screwed onto the bottom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#158
Del Paso said:
A very interesting interview about R1 development on Phototrend (why only 24MP, Digit accelerator, no global shutter etc...).
But en francais!
Click to expand...
"On the optical side, Canon offers a "hybrid" approach between photo and video, especially with its latest lenses. Similarly, it is proving to be innovative, especially in terms of virtual reality (VR). Conversely, the brand seems almost conservative when it comes to sensors... Isn't this a paradox?"
That is pretty typical of Canon.
Historically, they have been pretty conservative with bodies but pretty aggressive with lenses.
They get criticized for both.
People want more exciting cameras and more boring lenses.
To be fair, their PowerShot cameras have been pretty off the wall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#159
Michael Clark said:
The difference between the top pros and the wannabes is in what percentage they hit and miss.

It's not much difference from baseball. Hit .225 and you'll toil a few years in the minor leagues before having to find another way to earn a living. Hit .255 and you'll get a chance at some point to show what you've got in the show. Hit .285 in the majors for a decade or more and you're probably in the Hall of Fame. Hit .315 or better for your MLB career and you'll be mentioned in the short list for best [insert defensive position here] of all time.


The likes of Neil Leifer and Walter Ioss, Jr. hit a lot more consistently than even Ted Williams. And that was with slow film and slow cameras that were considered blazing fast if they had a 3 fps motor winder screwed onto the bottom.
Click to expand...
True, but a batter has to hit every time at bat, ideally. Ideally, a home run every time at bat.

The photographer gets unlimited swings, right? Hit rate for the photographer has less to do with it, in my opinion. With today's AF and shutter speeds the gap between the minor leagues and majors has closed dramatically. Getting "the shot" is easier than it has ever been. Like the pro ball player, photographers are given a box or access to areas others in the stands don't get. So a huge advantage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#160
Ozarker said:
True, but a batter has to hit every time at bat, ideally. Ideally, a home run every time at bat.

The photographer gets unlimited swings, right? Hit rate for the photographer has less to do with it, in my opinion. With today's AF and shutter speeds the gap between the minor leagues and majors has closed dramatically. Getting "the shot" is easier than it has ever been. Like the pro ball player, photographers are given a box or access to areas others in the stands don't get. So a huge advantage.
Click to expand...
The special place can also work against you, at music festivals the pros get 3 songs to take pictures, crammed into a small space with all their competitors. It is hard to take a picture that is noticeably different from the picture the pro next to you is taking.
Still better than phone-in-the-crowd, though :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
There will be changes to the Canon EOS R1 before launch
Replies
44
Views
5K
john1970
J
Canon Rumors
Canon EOS R1 in-store demos & possible shipping delay?
Replies
36
Views
2K
SvO2
S
Canon Rumors
There will be changes to the Canon EOS R1 before launch
Replies
0
Views
240
Canon Rumors
Canon Rumors
Canon Rumors
Here are a couple of images of the EOS R1 and EOS R5 Mark II
Replies
187
Views
10K
EOS 4 Life
E
Richard CR
Canon EOS R1 Field Report from Antarctica: A Wildlife Photographer’s Perspective
Replies
100
Views
4K
mmmm
M
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu