rangerider
Active member
Exactly how I feel. What a joke.
Canon R1 : Development Announcement
- Thread starter David Berry
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
rangerider
Active member
Okay, so setting aside my obvious frustration with the low MP sensor as a potential buyer for this camera, I'm not sure exactly what is happening here as far as product lineup and strategy for Canon. It seems to me that a) there wasn't really any forethought at all from Canon in building out this wonky lineup, or b) they intended the R1 to be the do-it-all high MP, high speed camera to compete with the A1, but they just couldn't get there after years of trying, so they're now stuck with two sports cameras at the top of their lineup. Either way it's pretty embarrassing for the company.
arbitrage
Well-known member
I’m sure Canon knows who they sell the most 1 series to and I’m sure they take in feedback from their top pros in those markets.
I’d assume that the sports and journalists are still the majority of sales.
And I assume they are still preferring to have lower MPs and faster performance.
We’ve argued this for years with every new flagship release. So far only Nikon has gone fully to a high MP flagship. Sony is sort of mixed as the A9III is their top sports body currently with lots of upgrades over the A1 (minus the pixels of course).
Canon will move the R5II to a higher level competing with Z8 and A1.
If one wants a rugged gripped high MP camera for wildlife then certainly the Z9 is the way to go and the lens selection is way better for that genre anyways.
I’d assume that the sports and journalists are still the majority of sales.
And I assume they are still preferring to have lower MPs and faster performance.
We’ve argued this for years with every new flagship release. So far only Nikon has gone fully to a high MP flagship. Sony is sort of mixed as the A9III is their top sports body currently with lots of upgrades over the A1 (minus the pixels of course).
Canon will move the R5II to a higher level competing with Z8 and A1.
If one wants a rugged gripped high MP camera for wildlife then certainly the Z9 is the way to go and the lens selection is way better for that genre anyways.
rangerider
Active member
This whole conversation about the niche sports genre being the designated flagship spot is archaic, a relic from the days when we couldn't have both MP and speed. We've moved past that. The A1 is both, the Z9 and Z8 are both, and Canon still seems to be stuck in that mindset, albeit probably due to a lack of innovation on their part with their own sensors. The moment they finally catch up you can bet we're going to see them brag about their all-rounder that finally competes. The R5 is not a robust body with all the bells and whistles, it's a mid-tier body. The a9 series is not positioned as the Sony flagship and the only reason that's up for debate is really because Sony uses mostly the same bodies with their cameras, but they obviously intend for the 1 series to be their flagship and the 9 series to be their sports. Nikon has moved on and offers the all rounders at their top spots. So where is Canon in all that? They've got no all-rounder flagship. They're depending on the R5 series to satiate the market that is now buying flagships elsewhere. And they're comparing both the R3 and the R1 to the second-tier sports cameras of their competitors. They're also claiming that they plan to unquestionably dominate the mirrorless market. It's all a bit of a head scratcher to me, personally.
RikWriter
Well-known member
But it makes the entire model pretty much irrelevant given that the R3 already exists. There's just not enough features in that description to encourage people to upgrade from the R3. Marketing wise, if these rumors are correct, it makes no business sense to release this model at all unless they're discontinuing the R3. It's not about what I want as a wildlife photographer since I have no intention of switching to Canon, it's about whether this body makes sense to release and IMHO it doesn't.
EricKlees
Well-known member
Not archaic, it's what it is. I, as a wildlife photographer, would never buy a FF 20-24MP body. 45MP FF is my minimum. For APS-C, 24-30mp would ideal.
That's not to say a FF 24MP body can't be used for wildlife. It's just you must get much closer and potentially pressuring the subject. Sometimes are close enough with no pressure. I get many shots with my Z9 that are frame filling or half fill the frame with no crop necessary. But many many more that require cropping
rangerider
Active member
When I say archaic I'm talking about the whole concept of having the sports line as your "best of the best" camera, which Canon has said this is going to be. When you're throttling your flagship to lower MPs so you can get your speed functionality to work for a very specific niche group of photographers, you're essentially just leaving everyone else out. This was the norm in the past because sensor tech was not there to allow both speed AND megapixels, but we crossed that point and are moving into the next phase here. Canon is not. So while I respect that each genre has its own needs, and I mean no disrespect to sports photographers, it makes little sense to me to build your best product (body quality, feature set, etc.) for a specific genre and not offer that for everyone else. I mean as wildlife photographers, I'd argue we demand more from a body physically than sports photographers. It makes no sense to me that this company would create their two best cameras for sports specifically and everyone else just has to settle for a second tier body in the R5. But hey, time will tell whether that's truly going to vault them into the unquestionable number one spot in mirrorless. As a wildlife photographer, I've lost interest in Canon, personally. And I was prepared to buy this camera and a nice 600 f/4 prime from them.
I can think of a couple of intriguing questions if the R1 remains at 24 MP.
How does Canon distiguish between the R1 and the R3, other than more fully weatherized/ruggedized? There may be QPAF. What else? Since we're talking focus on Sports camera, JPEG shooting and fast transport, what will the enhanced AI features add? Cropping, removing distractions, even further out - subject manipulation (see Google Pixel 8 "AI in your Hands").
As Rangefinder identifies, if the rumors stay on track, there appear to be two different camera maker approaches with Canon possibly deviating from the 'all rounders' offered by Sony and Nikon, by sticking with the traditional large pixel, rugged, fast Sports offering. Which approach sell more cameras?
How does Canon distiguish between the R1 and the R3, other than more fully weatherized/ruggedized? There may be QPAF. What else? Since we're talking focus on Sports camera, JPEG shooting and fast transport, what will the enhanced AI features add? Cropping, removing distractions, even further out - subject manipulation (see Google Pixel 8 "AI in your Hands").
As Rangefinder identifies, if the rumors stay on track, there appear to be two different camera maker approaches with Canon possibly deviating from the 'all rounders' offered by Sony and Nikon, by sticking with the traditional large pixel, rugged, fast Sports offering. Which approach sell more cameras?
EricKlees
Well-known member
Ahh sorry, misunderstood
rangerider
Active member
We're about to find out! My guess is the team at Canon responsible for their entry-level cameras is going to have a LOT more pressure on them to sell a gazillion new Rebels or R100s to prop up those numbers
arbitrage
Well-known member
I can't imagine the R3 lineup being continued if the R1 is 24MP also. If the R1 is higher MP then the R3 could be a lower MP sports body but really I just don't see any reason to have both R3 and R1 going forward. What would it be? Just a lower price point with a few less cutting edge features?
I thought the A9II was the last of that lineup but Sony managed to come up with a way to differentiate it from the A1 line and I suppose just like Canon's sales data for 1 series, Sony had feedback that 24MP was okay. Of course for Sony the 24MP may have been dictated by making a Global Shutter sensor and not all because of the sports market?? Who knows...not I
rangerider
Active member
Which begs the question why did they even make an R3 to begin with if it's a one and done? Leading us back to the obvious that it was supposed to be their R1 but Sony trumped them, so they went back to the drawing board and downgraded that version. If that is correct, then they were aiming for this R1 to be a do-it-all camera body but took several years and missed, so they rolled this one out.
EricKlees
Well-known member
There was rampant speculation when the R3 came out that it was originally the R1 but changed to to the R3 last minute for various reasons. One being it didn't compete with the A1 and Z9 with their 45MP sensors.
Many now think the R1 is just an R3 mkII with enhancements a few new features.
I think Canon, if I recall correctly or maybe it was rumor (don't recall exactly at this point) that there was going to be an R3 mkII
Pros in some fields happily pay $6500 for the still current dslr flagship at 20 MP. No joke, just giving pros what they want.
Loading…
www.usa.canon.com
rangerider
Active member
It's a joke in the context of the present market and competition. I'm glad sports shooters have a brand they can count on to give them the best for that genre. The rest of us, if we're interested in Canon, have to settle for their third-tier body in the R5 that doesn't have the same build quality, weather sealing, card slots, button configs, built in grip, feature set, heat dissipation, etc. So hopefully Canon has done the math that warrants the top two positions of their line being solely dedicated to the niche sports genre in 2024 while the competition moves on, because that is what they're committing themselves to.
EricKlees
Well-known member
Well it is a design issue. The materials used for the body retains heat and the size of the camera is not conducive to disapate heat. Yes, as discussed, summer card run really hot (SanDisk and Lexar at 80-85°C) and cards that run cooler (Delkin Black and ProGrade Cobalt 40-47°C) that obviously can make a difference,
I know people with the Z8 that have had the camera throw hot card and hot camera warnings and have had the camera shut down in video AND stills
There are YouTube videos of people shooting video and the Z8 throws a hot card warning at 16 min, hit camera at 30 min and camera shutdown at 39 minutes. These were indoors at 70-72°f.
The major customer for the R3 were press agencies, who gobbled them up. Ditto the R1, almost regardless of sensor size. As individuals, mostly non-pro sports photographers, I don't think you realize the infrastructure Canon provides at pro events. Trailers full of bodies, lenses and high-speed networks, as well as on-site techs. When I shoot pro surf events, I mostly see R3s and white lenses.
There are a lot of advantages from a smaller file with 24 megapixels. Canon certainly has an idea of what the market wants, and delivering some new capabilities and features will be interesting. Rather than complaining about the fact that it is 24 megapixels, I'm surprised the conversation has not had more attention to what the smaller image file allows Canon to do.
I'm expecting to see significantly faster frame rates, very deep buffers, and some new capabilities with pre-release, auto capture, and other technologies. Excellent subject detection is a given - but perhaps something new in terms of tracking. And we've seen new things with video, so perhaps extreme high speed frame rates or something similar is coming.
The other area we will likely see improvement is with reliability. High megapixel cameras with high frame rates or high resolution video have been challenging - particularly with regard to heat. The CFExpress Type B 4.0 cards will help. The R1 may be configured in a way that heat issues are no longer under discussion - even with fast frame rates or high speed video.
I'm expecting to see significantly faster frame rates, very deep buffers, and some new capabilities with pre-release, auto capture, and other technologies. Excellent subject detection is a given - but perhaps something new in terms of tracking. And we've seen new things with video, so perhaps extreme high speed frame rates or something similar is coming.
The other area we will likely see improvement is with reliability. High megapixel cameras with high frame rates or high resolution video have been challenging - particularly with regard to heat. The CFExpress Type B 4.0 cards will help. The R1 may be configured in a way that heat issues are no longer under discussion - even with fast frame rates or high speed video.
RikWriter
Well-known member
And they already had a pro sports body with that resolution. This one doesn't do much more than the R3.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
while there are some advantages to smaller MP sensors, i don't think this is one of them. there are lots of paths to a smaller file
rangerider
Active member
We should just go back to 12MP files. I bet they’d be super fast, and we could market it as a speed demon. Who needs more than 12MP, really?
David Berry
🇦🇺 Australia 🦘
Rear Buttons and Dials …
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Last edited:
EricKlees
Well-known member
Agreed. Sports shooters are generally shooting jpg so the file sizes often can be less than 10MP, making the file sizes quick and easy to upload
EricKlees
Well-known member
Only people that sell printsWe should just go back to 12MP files. I bet they’d be super fast, and we could market it as a speed demon. Who needs more than 12MP, really?
hef19898
Active member
People sold prints when 12 MP were the norm just fine, didn't they? Hell, people sold prints back when film was the norm just fine.
Just on thing, Canon, I assume, knows its target markets. And from what I can tell, BCG forum folks aren't it. Which just might be perfectly fine fine for Canon, and their target market.
Edit: That is, if, and we don't know, the R1 really only has 24 MP.
Just on thing, Canon, I assume, knows its target markets. And from what I can tell, BCG forum folks aren't it. Which just might be perfectly fine fine for Canon, and their target market.
Edit: That is, if, and we don't know, the R1 really only has 24 MP.
Last edited: