Canon R1 : Development Announcement

[Alistair]

Never underestimate Canon!

 

[rangerider]

Let's not forget Canon has a LOT of work to do with their wildlife lens lineup if this thing does in fact have the goods. Buying this shiny R1 and then using the Frankenprimes or plastic fantastics isn't going to cut it. I'm antsy to see if we get some new L superteles this year, as well.

 

[David Berry]

Jan Wegener comments on the R1:

and so does Matt Granger:

 

[EricKlees]

Let's face it. Sony mirrorless caught Canon with its pants down, just like they did Nikon.

The two reacted differently.

Nikon entered the MILC arena with some intermediate (some might say mediocre) cameras while it developed the technology for the Z9 and a new generation of offerings.

Canon came out with some solid, competitive cameras like the R5 and the R3 and telegraphed their killer haymaker--the R1--for at least the past four years.

Canon is a major player with deep pockets and a record for innovation. As the last mover, they have the benefit of seeing the weaknesses in others' product lines and can take advantage of new developments, such as those based on AI and microelectronics.

I think the R1 will be very advanced and highly impressive. It will generate a whole new trend of "gee, I'm thinking about switching to Canon" threads. Can't wait.

I think you're kind of describing what Nikon did, not Canon. Canon was out with their R5 before Nikon was with their Z9 (the R3 was afterwards if i remember correctly) and Nikon sat back and reversed engineered the AF. It's also known as Innovators Dilemma. This is where they let other spend the money and R&D and Nikon can reap the rewards of it.

The issue with the mid or entry models into mirrorless... Nikon wasn't all in on mirrorless at that point either. They weren't ready to give up on the DSLR quite yet till the Z9 was out. That was on them being a bit short-sighted.

I think the R1 might excite current Canon users to buy, but Canon's long glass (400mm and over) is the worst out there. They didn't have a lot of offerings. What they have is old DSLR lenses like the 600f4 with a permanently attached RF adapter and the lenses like 1200mm with a permanent adapter and 2x TC attached for $20k. The system currently making people switch is Nikon. The AF at this point is splitting hairs between Nikon, Sony and Canon so what's the tipping of the scales currently is the glass Nikon is offering. I think Canon is behind Sony and Nikon in this regard

 

[John Navitsky]

I think you're kind of describing what Nikon did, not Canon. Canon was out with their R5 before Nikon was with their Z9 (the R3 was afterwards if i remember correctly)

yes, canon came out first, then z9, then r3 iirc

and Nikon sat back and reversed engineered the AF.

i highly suspect that's not true (that they reverse engineered competitor's AF)

It's also known as Innovators Dilemma. This is where they let other spend the money and R&D and Nikon can reap the rewards of it.

since we don't _know_, it's certainly reasonable to speculate, but i really don't think that's what happened.

the z9 is a clear re-imaging of the pro body that has a lot of it's own characteristics like the data pipeline that the sony and canon bodies still don't replicate.

i think it's much more likely that at some point, probably the a9, canon and nikon realized that it WAS possible to do a pro sports body and once you know it's possible, you find a way. up until that point, i don't think they thought it was possible to get from point a to b in a reasonable and commercially viable way. and it also told them they HAD TO and they had to RIGHT NOW or their goose was cooked.

both canon and nikon appear to have taken different strategies. canon tried to get something out soon with the r6 and r5 and there are benefits from getting out soon. nikon seemed to be willing to play the long game and basically totally overhauled their design with the z9, which had the side effect (and they had to know that) of ceding market share in the mean time

while you are right that there are certainly benefits from being last, i don't think in this case they are exactly the benefit you are suggesting (that they copied/reverse engineered competitors)

The issue with the mid or entry models into mirrorless... Nikon wasn't all in on mirrorless at that point either. They weren't ready to give up on the DSLR quite yet till the Z9 was out. That was on them being a bit short-sighted.

again, i read this differently.

imo nikon wasn't ABLE to make a pro sport body... until it was. and the z9 was that point.

it's not an issue of being short sighted. i'm sure they WANTED to do it. but they simply couldn't.

my take is the z6/z7 were basically something they could do with the tech they could adapt, they put it in as a placeholder, then they were willing to eat the pain till they could deliver the z9

same with EVERYONE. they deliver the camera THEY CAN, AT THAT TIME. the r6 was the camera canon could deliver. the r3 after that. if they could have delivered the r1 a year ago they would have done that.

yes, there are development priorities and strategies but none of these were dumb. and the fact they picked _differently_ probably saved them all since if everyone delivered using the same approach, we'd have losers. here, we have... different.

I think the R1 might excite current Canon users to buy, but Canon's long glass (400mm and over) is the worst out there. They didn't have a lot of offerings. What they have is old DSLR lenses like the 600f4 with a permanently attached RF adapter and the thinks like 1200mm with a permanent adapter and 2x TC attached for $20k. The system currently making people switch is Nikon.

yes, like the bodies, they took different strategies on glass. nikon took a huge hit and got a lot of flack by insisting on REDESIGNING every lens and simply didn't have a lot of z mount glass for a long time. canon got the upper hand in having lenses early. but in both cases there were pros and cons. in both cases i think these were deliberate strategies by the companies.

 

[nmerc_photos]

Let's face it. Sony mirrorless caught Canon with its pants down, just like they did Nikon.

The two reacted differently.

Nikon entered the MILC arena with some intermediate (some might say mediocre) cameras while it developed the technology for the Z9 and a new generation of offerings.

Canon came out with some solid, competitive cameras like the R5 and the R3 and telegraphed their killer haymaker--the R1--for at least the past four years.

Canon is a major player with deep pockets and a record for innovation. As the last mover, they have the benefit of seeing the weaknesses in others' product lines and can take advantage of new developments, such as those based on AI and microelectronics.

I think the R1 will be very advanced and highly impressive. It will generate a whole new trend of "gee, I'm thinking about switching to Canon" threads. Can't wait.

I don't think I've ever seen a post where someone wanted to swap brands just for a body. It's always the lenses that matter. All the bodies are relatively similar. "Date the body, marry the lens".

For wildlife interested folk, Canon has only introduced 2 competitive or innovative products since they launched mirrorless in 2018. The RF 100-500 and RF 200-800. Potentially 3 or 4 if you count the 600/800 F11s - but I find those are more gimmicky than anything.

The R5 was (is) a phenomenal body, and the R3 would've been one if it had been 45MP instead of 24MP. But outside of those zooms, Canon is miles behind in their wildlife offerings.

At this point, they need more than just a killer body. Whether it be the R1 or R5II. They need to start producing some innovative lenses. I'll take the opposite side of your argument, and I think the R1 is going to underwhelm - and that it'll serve as the last big holding point before a slew of people swap to Nikon. I've heard so many people say "Canon's not doing anything for wildlife, but I'm holding out for the R1/R5II before I switch to Nikon". These releases have a ton of pressure on them.

 

[EricKlees]

yes, canon came out first, then z9, then r3 iirc


i highly suspect that's not true


since we don't _know_, it's certainly reasonable to speculate, but i really don't think that's what happened. the z9 is a clear re-imaging of the pro body that has a lot of it's own characteristics like the data pipeline that the sony and canon bodies still don't replicate.

i think it's much more likely that at some point, probably the a9, canon and nikon realized that it WAS possible to do a pro sports body and once you know it's possible, you find a way. up until that point, i don't think they thought it was possible to get from point a to b in a reasonable and commercially viable way. and it also told them they HAD TO and they had to RIGHT NOW or their goose was cooked.

both canon and nikon appear to have taken different strategies. canon tried to get something out soon with the r6 and r5 and there are benefits from getting out soon. nikon seemed to be willing to play the long game and basically totally overhauled their design with the z9, which had the side effect (and they had to know that) of ceding market share in the mean time

while you are right that there are certainly benefits from being last, i don't think in this case they are exactly the benefit you are suggesting


again, i read this differently.

imo nikon wasn't ABLE to make a pro sport body... until it was. and the z9 was that point.

it's not an issue of being short sighted. i'm sure they WANTED to do it. but they simply couldn't.

my take is the z6/z7 were basically something they could do with the tech they could adapt, they put it in as a placeholder, then they were willing to eat the pain till they could deliver the z9

same with EVERYONE. they deliver the camera THEY CAN, AT THAT TIME. the r6 was the camera canon could deliver. the r3 after that. if they could have delivered the r1 a year ago they would have done that.

yes, there are development priorities and strategies but none of these were dumb. and the fact they picked _differently_ probably saved them all since if everyone delivered using the same approach, we'd have losers. here, we have... different.


yes, like the bodies, they took different strategies on glass. nikon took a huge hit and got a lot of flack by insisting on REDESIGNING every lens and simply didn't have a lot of z mount glass for a long time. canon got the upper hand in having lenses early. but in both cases there were pros and cons. in both cases i think these were deliberate strategies by the companies.

The Innovators Dilemma I'm talking about with Nikon is the AF not the design of the body and i think that is wholly what happened.

Nikon themselves came out and said they weren't abandoning the DSLR with original announcements of the D780, and a D6 release and that a D850 replacement was coming. Then 6 months or however long it was after that they said no more development was going to happen with DSLRs and they were focusing solely on mirrorless. That happened and is pretty clear to me they recognized their short-sightedness.

Canon and Nikon did take 2 different paths. But i don't think Canon's path with glass was any better. Nikon ended up making better glass (arguably) but while they did, they F mount glass adapted beautifully and actually working better on Z bodies then DSLRs. Nikon path in the end (currently) had left Canon far behind. They need to do a lot of work to catch up at this point.

Canon's launched a lot more bodies and better APS-C bodies but that's normal for Canon and Sony, Nikon updates their bodies much more compared to Sony and Canon that want to you to just keep buying new bodies for updates and new features. Nikon isn't interested in the crop bodies currently by choice

 

[rangerider]

I don't think I've ever seen a post where someone wanted to swap brands just for a body. It's always the lenses that matter. All the bodies are relatively similar. "Date the body, marry the lens".

For wildlife interested folk, Canon has only introduced 2 competitive or innovative products since they launched mirrorless in 2018. The RF 100-500 and RF 200-800. Potentially 3 or 4 if you count the 600/800 F11s - but I find those are more gimmicky than anything.

The R5 was (is) a phenomenal body, and the R3 would've been one if it had been 45MP instead of 24MP. But outside of those zooms, Canon is miles behind in their wildlife offerings.

At this point, they need more than just a killer body. Whether it be the R1 or R5II. They need to start producing some innovative lenses. I'll take the opposite side of your argument, and I think the R1 is going to underwhelm - and that it'll serve as the last big holding point before a slew of people swap to Nikon. I've heard so many people say "Canon's not doing anything for wildlife, but I'm holding out for the R1/R5II before I switch to Nikon". These releases have a ton of pressure on them.

I am the case study you're describing here. I bought the R5 with 100-500mm the day they came out. Shot with the setup for over a year and loved the body, but very much needed better glass options. You can't chase owls with a 100-500 f/7.1 at dusk, and I wasn't willing to spend $10k+ for the Frankenprimes, which felt a little insulting. Waited and waited and waited for Canon to compete with Nikon as they rolled out their PF offerings and built in TC primes, but only the f/11s came from Canon. I've got a $20k budget built up now and am ready to invest in a flagship body and larger prime, and I'm just sitting back licking my chops right now waiting to see this next round of offerings from all three companies in the Olympics year. May the best lens lineup for wildlife (and secondarily the best flagship body) win

 

[arbitrage]

I don't think I've ever seen a post where someone wanted to swap brands just for a body. It's always the lenses that matter. All the bodies are relatively similar. "Date the body, marry the lens".

For wildlife interested folk, Canon has only introduced 2 competitive or innovative products since they launched mirrorless in 2018. The RF 100-500 and RF 200-800. Potentially 3 or 4 if you count the 600/800 F11s - but I find those are more gimmicky than anything.

The R5 was (is) a phenomenal body, and the R3 would've been one if it had been 45MP instead of 24MP. But outside of those zooms, Canon is miles behind in their wildlife offerings.

At this point, they need more than just a killer body. Whether it be the R1 or R5II. They need to start producing some innovative lenses. I'll take the opposite side of your argument, and I think the R1 is going to underwhelm - and that it'll serve as the last big holding point before a slew of people swap to Nikon. I've heard so many people say "Canon's not doing anything for wildlife, but I'm holding out for the R1/R5II before I switch to Nikon". These releases have a ton of pressure on them.

I'll be that odd man out....I've switched between all the big three brands and at one time was overlapped so much I was shooting all three systems at once.
I would say that most times I switched it was more driven by the cameras and not the lenses. I had a 500/4 or 600/4 with all the brands.

The only time I'd say it was a lens that motivated me was the 500PF to some extent but then I was already shooting Nikon at that time along side Canon and Sony.

I started with all Canon gear, 7D series, 5D series 1DX/1DXII and then first dabbled in Nikon because of the D500 and then added D850. I got to try a friend's A9 and immediately bought one to add to my 1DXII and D500 I had at that time. The A9 and then A9II and then A1 pushed me further and further towards a full Sony setup. I owned the R5, owned the Z9 (twice) but every time sold them and went back to my Sony cameras.

I will admit the reason I kept buying the Z9 was to convince myself I could switch to it because the Nikon lenses like 600TC, 600PF, etc were very tempting. But despite that, the A1 camera stopped me from another system switch in the end. The camera once again won over the lenses.

 

[Nimi]

I was ready to jump off the D5 to the R5, but because my business required more and more video, the (real, tested) overheating issues made it an impossibility. The Z9 took care of that concern; it remains the only viable 8k body that doesn't overheat under the conditions I shoot. I since added a Sony 4k body which 4 years later is still the best under $5k cine body.

The A9iii is an amazing body, but it overheated after about 20 minutes of 4k shooting when I tested it last month.

The R5C is capable, but I get better files with the Z9 and the ergonomics aren't great.

If the R1 has 6k and doesn't overheat, and if they give it 6k/120 or 4k/240 and proper codecs that are currently exclusive to the C70 and C300, I'll give it a try. Canon has excellent RF cine lenses, which neither Sony nor Nikon make.

 

[rangerider]

I'll be that odd man out....I've switched between all the big three brands and at one time was overlapped so much I was shooting all three systems at once.
I would say that most times I switched it was more driven by the cameras and not the lenses. I had a 500/4 or 600/4 with all the brands.

The only time I'd say it was a lens that motivated me was the 500PF to some extent but then I was already shooting Nikon at that time along side Canon and Sony.

I started with all Canon gear, 7D series, 5D series 1DX/1DXII and then first dabbled in Nikon because of the D500 and then added D850. I got to try a friend's A9 and immediately bought one to add to my 1DXII and D500 I had at that time. The A9 and then A9II and then A1 pushed me further and further towards a full Sony setup. I owned the R5, owned the Z9 (twice) but every time sold them and went back to my Sony cameras.

I will admit the reason I kept buying the Z9 was to convince myself I could switch to it because the Nikon lenses like 600TC, 600PF, etc were very tempting. But despite that, the A1 camera stopped me from another system switch in the end. The camera once again won over the lenses.

Based on all the gear you've been able to shoot with, I'm curious what you're thinking about the three different systems going into this Olympics year. Seems we might wind up seeing the R1, Z9ii, and A1ii around the same time later this year or early next year. I imagine we'll get some longer glass, as well. Are you looking for anything in particular that might fill the gaps in Canon or Nikon's lineup or are you pretty content sitting back and waiting for that next A1ii?

 

[John Navitsky]

The Innovators Dilemma I'm talking about with Nikon is the AF not the design of the body and i think that is wholly what happened.

Nikon themselves came out and said they weren't abandoning the DSLR with original announcements of the D780, and a D6 release and that a D850 replacement was coming. Then 6 months or however long it was after that they said no more development was going to happen with DSLRs and they were focusing solely on mirrorless. That happened and is pretty clear to me they recognized their short-sightedness.

yes, i think we just attribute this differently. i think they didn't say they were all in on mirrorless because they didn't see a viable path for them to get all the way to a mirrorless pro sports body. and if you don't see a way to get there with mirrorless, you still need dslr. well, until you know you HAVE to, then perhaps you just take a leap of faith

it would be interesting to know when they made the mirrorless statement as what's happening around that time is likely the catalyst for them taking the leap of faith

 

[John Woodworth]

Let me just say, as an event photographer versus the majority wildlife photographers on here, the requirements are much different. Speaking broadly, the compositional opportunities for street, photojournalism, event and sports photography are more predictable. The majority of focal lengths are 14 to 200 mm. With high quality zooms, precisely framed images can be made such that little to no cropping is required. Canon owned these genres for over a decade until Sony came along with lighter, quieter better focusing MILCs. Canon is still a big player, just not so much in wildlife.

Nikon seems to have discovered a competitive niche for wildlife with long, light glass and just enough megaPixels to extend the reach a bit with cropping.

 

[ajrmd]

I am the case study you're describing here. I bought the R5 with 100-500mm the day they came out. Shot with the setup for over a year and loved the body, but very much needed better glass options. You can't chase owls with a 100-500 f/7.1 at dusk, and I wasn't willing to spend $10k+ for the Frankenprimes, which felt a little insulting. Waited and waited and waited for Canon to compete with Nikon as they rolled out their PF offerings and built in TC primes, but only the f/11s came from Canon. I've got a $20k budget built up now and am ready to invest in a flagship body and larger prime, and I'm just sitting back licking my chops right now waiting to see this next round of offerings from all three companies in the Olympics year. May the best lens lineup for wildlife (and secondarily the best flagship body) win

Well, the R5 proceeded the 100-500 by a few months (July vs. Sept. 2020 respectively) and I received my R5 in the first batch. Loved the camera and the 100-500 came in October of the same year. the 100-500 was a special lens though it found a more permanent home when the R7 appeared (effective FL 160-700) and it became a go to, lightweight walk around WL combination. As you observed, Canon eschewed the middle market and offered super expensive and relatively uninspiring long primes and plastic fantastic slow periscopes. Then to add insult to injury they recently released a rare 9'er narwal of a lens. I hope that you developed a strategy other than banking the coin during that dry spell, though I couldn't take it any longer and went to the dark side. No, the Vader system ain't perfect, but the lenses are great and they continue to make improvements on the bodies FW. In some ways the Z8 surpasses the R5, though the IQ on the old lady was better, the AF detected subjects at a further distance, and tracked them better IMHO (stickier, better eye detect for humans/beast, fewer OOF frames). The Z8's battery life, lack of RS, lack of EVF lag, programmability, video, VR, and other features are far superior. Maybe if Canon started producing some lightweight medium priced lenses like a RF 400 DO, and a 600 DO, I'd consider moving back. Bottom line is there is no free lunch, but my Tuna sandwich is doing ok and I've only encountered a few bones so far.

 

[rangerider]

Well, the R5 proceeded the 100-500 by a few months (July vs. Sept. 2020 respectively) and I received my R5 in the first batch. Loved the camera and the 100-500 came in October of the same year. the 100-500 was a special lens though it found a more permanent home when the R7 appeared (effective FL 160-700) and it became a go to, lightweight walk around WL combination. As you observed, Canon eschewed the middle market and offered super expensive and relatively uninspiring long primes and plastic fantastic slow periscopes. Then to add insult to injury they recently released a rare 9'er narwal of a lens. I hope that you developed a strategy other than banking the coin during that dry spell, though I couldn't take it any longer and went to the dark side. No, the Vader system ain't perfect, but the lenses are great and they continue to make improvements on the bodies FW. In some ways the Z8 surpasses the R5, though the IQ on the old lady was better, the AF detected subjects at a further distance, and tracked them better IMHO (stickier, better eye detect for humans/beast, fewer OOF frames). The Z8's battery life, lack of RS, lack of EVF lag, programmability, video, VR, and other features are far superior. Maybe if Canon started producing some lightweight medium priced lenses like a RF 400 DO, and a 600 DO, I'd consider moving back. Bottom line is there is no free lunch, but my Tuna sandwich is doing ok and I've only encountered a few bones so far.

I was right there with you. Picked up the first R5 in my area and just grabbed one of the cheap wide lenses (35mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.8, can't recall as I owned both at various times) to use for a while until that 100-500 was released. By then I knew the camera at least and could hit the ground running for critters. I recently sold both, as I picked up the Sony A7RV and 200-600 to replace them until I decide what system to invest in with a flagship and longer prime. I'm enjoying this setup, although the 200-600 is much heavier. I miss the R5's triple BBAF, but I don't miss the 100-500 at all. Too slow and wonky with the TC for my taste.

I'm leaning towards a Nikon move just simply for the glass. Got a chance to hold the Z9 and Z8 a week or so ago and they seemed okay. I'm not crazy about them, honestly, but I didn't get to shoot them at all. I'm like you, I'm thinking longer term investment in a system and the glass is the starting point for me. The bodies will improve over time. I'm in no rush so will probably wait until we have at least some details and development announcements for the R1, Z9ii, and A1ii here soon. Hopefully some new glass comes out between now and then for the Olympics, and I'll be fine with my Sony A7RV and 200-600 until then. It's a good time to be investing in a system, I believe. Things are maturing here.

 

[arbitrage]

Based on all the gear you've been able to shoot with, I'm curious what you're thinking about the three different systems going into this Olympics year. Seems we might wind up seeing the R1, Z9ii, and A1ii around the same time later this year or early next year. I imagine we'll get some longer glass, as well. Are you looking for anything in particular that might fill the gaps in Canon or Nikon's lineup or are you pretty content sitting back and waiting for that next A1ii?

I'm pretty content now to wait for the A1II.
I just finished a couple weeks with an A9III loaner and loved a lot of the new features but missed my 50MPs so I scratched that itch.
Borrowed my friend's Z8 on latest 2.0 FW and despite some nice improvements to AF, it didn't place above my A1 so I scratched that itch.

My next purchase is the Sony 300GM after I find a buyer for my 400GM. Then it is just waiting for the A1II.

When Nikon releases a Z9II/Z8II I will take another look because I'm always tempted by the lenses. But now that I can buy the 300GM/2xTC to mimic the 600PF, the only other temptation is the 400TC and 600TC. But having the TC isn't enough to make me do a full system switch once again unless the Z9II really has something special.

 

[EricKlees]

I was right there with you. Picked up the first R5 in my area and just grabbed one of the cheap wide lenses (35mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.8, can't recall as I owned both at various times) to use for a while until that 100-500 was released. By then I knew the camera at least and could hit the ground running for critters. I recently sold both, as I picked up the Sony A7RV and 200-600 to replace them until I decide what system to invest in with a flagship and longer prime. I'm enjoying this setup, although the 200-600 is much heavier. I miss the R5's triple BBAF, but I don't miss the 100-500 at all. Too slow and wonky with the TC for my taste.

I'm leaning towards a Nikon move just simply for the glass. Got a chance to hold the Z9 and Z8 a week or so ago and they seemed okay. I'm not crazy about them, honestly, but I didn't get to shoot them at all. I'm like you, I'm thinking longer term investment in a system and the glass is the starting point for me. The bodies will improve over time. I'm in no rush so will probably wait until we have at least some details and development announcements for the R1, Z9ii, and A1ii here soon. Hopefully some new glass comes out between now and then for the Olympics, and I'll be fine with my Sony A7RV and 200-600 until then. It's a good time to be investing in a system, I believe. Things are maturing here.

Nikon can always pull a switch-a-roo and announce a Z9II early but I think it's highly doubtful before 4 years leaving that not till the end of 2025 or sometime in 2026 for that years Olympics. Certainly much more likely the R1/R5II and an A1 II are out sometime this year. Nikon still has a Z6III and likely a Z5 and Z50 refresh before a Z9II is announced. Nikon does not announce bodies all that closely together like Canon and Sony.

 

[rangerider]

Someone over on Fred Miranda, "JaimitoFrog" is saying Adorama accidentally leaked the specs (page is now taken down). Not sure if there's any truth to that as we can't see the page, but looks like it could be accurate based on rumors. He typed up the summary bullet points from the page, so any typos/errors are on him, not Adorama.

Looks like Adorama webpage leaked the specs:

High-speed autofocus and exposure enhanced by AI recognition
Moving object trajectory prediction, high success rate smart object lock focus tracking
30MP full-frame stacked dual-gain sensor
Purely electronic rolling shutter faster than any mechanical rolling shutter
1/1,250 sec flash sync time (<0.8 microsecond read time)
Added 1:3 lossy compression CRAW (compared to lossless compression)
Unlimited 40fps (1:2 CRAW) / 60fps (1:3 CRAW) continuous shooting
Up to 120fps full-featured continuous shooting
Supports 240fps burst continuous shooting mode, 1 second pre-shooting
Enhanced dynamic range, better than EOS R3 and EOS R5


https://www.adorama.com/car1.html?utm_medium=email&emailprice=T&utm_source=Bluecore-051524-05PM-NPA-Canon-EOS-R1-Camera&utm_content=051524-05PM-NPA-Canon-EOS-R1-Camera&utm_campaign=051524-05PM-NPA-Canon-EOS-R1-Camera-P-G-NA-GLP&obem=iiEXya1YUSoW2xQxbrcMytux2HDmioqjtyJ4LsjO7eE%3D&bc_lcid=t5945673790906368lw4908732874088448li0&utm_source=Bluecore-051524-05PM-NPA-Canon-EOS-R1-Camera#main-product-tabs

 

[EricKlees]

Someone over on Fred Miranda, "JaimitoFrog" is saying Adorama accidentally leaked the specs (page is now taken down). Not sure if there's any truth to that as we can't see the page, but looks like it could be accurate based on rumors. He typed up the summary bullet points from the page, so any typos/errors are on him, not Adorama.

I find that highly doubtful. If Canon is holding the specs back and it's only a development announcement, why would they reveal the specs to a retailer to potentially leak? Then you have the fact it's not even a finished product, most certainly there will be tweaks or even some changes.

 

[rangerider]

The page is actually still up: https://www.adorama.com/car1.html?utm_medium=email#main-product-tabs

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[JAJohnson]

Someone over on Fred Miranda, "JaimitoFrog" is saying Adorama accidentally leaked the specs (page is now taken down). Not sure if there's any truth to that as we can't see the page, but looks like it could be accurate based on rumors. He typed up the summary bullet points from the page, so any typos/errors are on him, not Adorama.

The specs are still visible on adorama’s website. I haven’t seen this detail anywhere else.

https://www.adorama.com/car1.html#main-product-tabs

 

[rangerider]

Well, I'm sure this R1 is going to be an absolutely fantastic camera, but if true 30MP is not going to be enough for me, so that will rule out Canon. I've grown spoiled with cropping using my 61MP Sony, and if I make the move over to Nikon I can have my speed and megapixels, as well. Not sure what Canon is thinking here if these are accurate, honestly, but maybe I'm just in the minority.

 

[JAJohnson]

PR departments are always terrible at giving useful information before a camera is released. I would bet that this will be similar to the Sony A9 III, a great action camera at the 30 MP range.

Apparently it has a 30 MP APS-C sensor.

 

[ajrmd]

I'm pretty content now to wait for the A1II.
I just finished a couple weeks with an A9III loaner and loved a lot of the new features but missed my 50MPs so I scratched that itch.
Borrowed my friend's Z8 on latest 2.0 FW and despite some nice improvements to AF, it didn't place above my A1 so I scratched that itch.

My next purchase is the Sony 300GM after I find a buyer for my 400GM. Then it is just waiting for the A1II.

When Nikon releases a Z9II/Z8II I will take another look because I'm always tempted by the lenses. But now that I can buy the 300GM/2xTC to mimic the 600PF, the only other temptation is the 400TC and 600TC. But having the TC isn't enough to make me do a full system switch once again unless the Z9II really has something special.

Understand completely and you nailed the landscape or should I say, wildscape?

 

[JAJohnson]

Well, I'm sure this R1 is going to be an absolutely fantastic camera, but if this is true 30MP is not going to be enough for me, so that rules out Canon. I've grown spoiled with cropping using my 61MP Sony, and if I make the move over to Nikon I can have my speed and megapixels, as well. Not sure what Canon is thinking here, honestly, but maybe I'm just in the minority.

I think it’s what they can produce now, in time for the Olympics. Clearly they’re touting new AF tech meant for sports: improved subject tracking accuracy in the context of sporting events and their new Action Priority function.