Canon R5m2 & R1 : First Impressions

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).

I think 24 would be plenty except wildlife is so unpredictable we need to crop to 24 sometimes. For me the R5 is the better do everything camera, but I could see the R1 for events, sports, weddings, portraits, news.
Yeah, I think 24MP is fine for most things but it is nice to have extra at times. The active follow AF for certain sports looks really cool. I think it would be interesting to try out. If it works as well as it appeared to, that will be a huge addition for sports shooters.
 
In my experience, the Nikon cameras are a bit more susceptible to moire though with the offset of providing sharper OOC files and they are better for landscape and astro work.

I guess I'd have to see apples to apples evidence that they were sharper as a broad generalization. Maybe compare similarly priced models and similar lenses. Maybe a R1 or R5ii with a 600 f4 compared to a Z9 or Z8 with a 600 f4 with the same test scene
 
Not-so-Minor Changes…
#2 : R5ii — Three Battery Grips

At first, three battery grips sounds excessive (maybe it is).

All grips can take one or two LP-E6P batteries.
  • Regular Grip : BG-R20
    • vertical shooting — duplicate buttons/dials
    • the grip for wildlife photographers

  • Regular Grip with Ethernet : BG-R20EP
    • vertical shooting — duplicate buttons/dials
    • ethernet port
    • the grip for studio photographers

  • Cooling Fan Grip : CF-R20EP
    • not intended for vertical shooting — no duplicate buttons/dials
    • cooling fan for prolonged video shooting (without any time limit?)
    • ethernet port
    • the grip for videographers
 
Last edited:
From my perspective whose focus is nearly exclusively wildlife photography, these cameras remind me of VW's TV ads when the automatic transmission was first available in the beetle:

"Volkswagen takes a giant leap into the present"

the R1 has decent readout speed but only 24MP where the Nikon/Sony (z9 or a1) competition has 45/50 MP or compared with the a9III, 40 frames/sec vs. 120 with a global shutter.

the R5II has a high-resolution sensor but the readout speed, while improved over the R5, lags behind the z8/a1. Rolling shutter effects TBD.

I had hoped Canon would have put more competitive pressure on Nikon and Sony, but it looks like they're playing catch-up. IMHO they've caught up quite well but leapfrogging Nikon/Sony would have gotten more attention and would have better positioned their product lineup for the next few years. Note that these new cameras have caught up with competitors' cameras that are now a few years old.
 
Thanks, John.

Perhaps, every BCG wildlife photographer should watch Kym Illman's video in order to appreciate the frenetic 24-megapixel-jpeg world of the sports photographer — like taking a photo of an F1 car's tyres (at speed!) and sending it to the crew chief in the pits for assessment of tyre wear.

Serious use of a 'flagship' camera, indeed; even if most of us would prefer to stick to our 45 MP raw files.

That Kym speaks our language without the trace of an accent (that I can discern) is a bonus.

… David
Another example of photojournalism which stressed camera (and photographer) capabilities occurred during the Trump assassination attempt. There were (only) four expert photojournalists in the pit when the shots rang out. At least two were shooting Sony A1's. All four captured extraordinary images.

One of the images captured the bullet after it passed through former president Trump's ear (as I'm sure most have heard). It was taken at 1/8000th s and 30fps (according to one source) by Doug Mills of the New York Times. In many ways it was a fluke, but it also was a result of being pre-composed, the technology and settings of a great camera, and having the presence-of-mind and experience to continue taking great pictures.

These pictures were uploaded to NYC within minutes, directly from the camera, and evaluated by an editor. In one version I read, it was an editor that first spotted the bullet in a jpeg and called Mills to verify it in the RAW file before publishing it.

There are other fine examples of images, like the one of former president trump framed by Secret Service Agents' legs as they protect him as captured by Anna Moneymaker of Getty Images. There are various crops of this online.

These situations, in my mind, argue for higher resolution sensors than 24 MP. Sometimes you just can't see what is in your frame until the action has passed and you discover something historic.

Sometimes it is just best to shoot wide and crop later.
 
Last edited:
Overall I think its a step in the right direction, we are in for some interesting times............
In their promo they show taking stills from actual video.....................the future.

I feel Canon is defiantly first on the podium for focus tracking, Sony second Nikon 3rd.

I am keen to see what Sony comes out with and Nikon 2024 - 25.

45mp is ok, 60 would be better even as a slower camera or even with 80mp........its not all about crazy speed LOL.

Only an opinion
 
Last edited:
in the petapixel podcast video they pointed out this wasn’t great in practice. they indicated just extracting frames from high shutter speed video worked better for them iirc
Interesting attempt by Canon and showing a future direction as to where things are heading.
It seems also Canon has-lived up to their objective of focusing on connectivity.
 
Yeah, I think 24MP is fine for most things but it is nice to have extra at times. The active follow AF for certain sports looks really cool. I think it would be interesting to try out. If it works as well as it appeared to, that will be a huge addition for sports shooters.
For myself the extra pixels often makes my lens go further when needed through cropping, if i need less resolution or file size i can dial in less, i can also flick back and forth to DX FX, its really a far better versatile tool like having several cameras all in one. More useful than 24 or 20mp, the little trade of in ISO or speed if at all is not an issue unless your dedicated needs are specifically like a A9 III delivers.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 93325


Guts Swanepoel (Pangolin):
  • "I think they [Canon] may have started to listen to us finally about what we, as photographers, need."
  • "My favourite feature is the pre-capture which is in both cameras. Sadly, the R3 and the older R5 will never have it; it remains a hardware issue, not just a software update."



Jan Wegener (Early Bird Show):
  • "Let's look at the R1 first — Canon's new flagship sports camera."
And there's the rub? The R1 is designed for photojournalists; the R5ii is the better choice for enthusiast-level wildlife photographers?
For myself - Jan Wegener (Early Bird Show) initial snap shot review of the R1, 5d mk II is short concise informative and good to listen to, he doesn't get long winded on one point, he says only what really matters and holds your attention to the end. There is more than enough tangible content to make your decision to buy or not.

It appears Canon has made some practical improvements and added options that matter and are targeted to what the user actually needs or wants in a tool.

Comparing new features of the R1 and 5 d mk II to other brands is irrelevant, it’s what glass you have and how the camera compliments what you achieve as a harmonized system.

My feeling is the 5d mk II is a great and powerful incredibly versatile tool.


The R1 is a refined extension of the tried and proven previous generation, 24mp is more than enough for sports action and especially when instant live transmission is the single most important feature these days for professionals covering major events.

I would think Endless buffer in the 5 d mk II is not something required normally, if it is then video the subject or improve your skill sets.

There are a lot of good new features in both new models, i mean really how much pre capture frames do you really need or how often.

The EVF is a huge leap in the R 1, putting whiskers on some other competitors models.

I feel Canon has put a lot of refined thought into both models and well targeted.

Connectivity is key for sports action or paparazzi events, you want what you have taken to be on the desk as it’s taken, if its sports or news.


Canons focusing system has and still holds pole position, and 1st place on the podium, Sony second, Nik 3rd.

In the world there are creators, copiers, cosnumers, leaders and followers, the only thing that seperates them or makes them different is time.

Only an opinion
 
I’m a big Jan Wegener fan too!
He is smart hands on practical and informative, which filters out many others, Steve of course is on the podium LOL as one of if not the best in the business.

Its surprising how many people have actually transitioned to doing more video.

I think Canon has put a lot of practical targeted thought into these two models.
 
He is smart hands on practical and informative, which filters out many others, Steve of course is on the podium LOL as one of if not the best in the business.

Its surprising how many people have actually transitioned to doing more video.

I think Canon has put a lot of practical targeted thought into these two models.


Not that surprising. Basically, it's very difficult to make money as a still wildlife photographer these days. People make money from monetized YouTube channels and from tours/classes. Videos feed better into that business model.
 
Agree, it is for that reason i feel still photography has a use by date for main stream advertising and marketing.

Even bill boards are going video screen clips especially in shopping centers and shop window displays.

Camera manufacturers know that the U Tubes and Tik Toks of the world are driving the shape of our world strongly with video as the most practical form of advertising engagement and influence.

Stills will have to finally come from video and effortlessly.

Interesting what Canon are doing.

Only an opinion.
 
Agree, it is for that reason i feel still photography has a use by date for main stream advertising and marketing.

Even bill boards are going video screen clips especially in shopping centers and shop window displays.

Camera manufacturers know that the U Tubes and Tik Toks of the world are driving the shape of our world strongly with video as the most practical form of advertising engagement and influence.

Stills will have to finally come from video and effortlessly.

Interesting what Canon are doing.

Only an opinion.
I don’t think still photography is going to go away in advertising and marketing but would agree the current trend is towards more video. Sometimes a still image is able to capture a more powerful meaning, other times video so it really depends on message.

What I don’t understand is the expectation that stills will come from video. You’re not the only person I have seen post this. Maybe you can explain how this will occur. From my experience, in stills you generally want a crisp, sharp image without motion blur with some obvious exceptions. In video, you generally want a smooth flow that is appealing to the eye which generally means a little motion blur to each frame. If you were to shoot a faster shutter to freeze the action for a still image you end up with a more jittery look to the video. You can shoot more frames per second and increase your shutter speed but it seems a lot of research shows people prefer around 24-30fps range. With vertical video becoming a thing, maybe jittery video will become the new norm too 🤷‍♂️
 
I'm trying to figure out what features nikon is ahead of the R5II mind letting me know? I have the Z9 and Z8 and love em both but Nikon jpeg only feature pre capture just doesn't cut it.
You don't really need to figure out the Z8, as the R5II is catching up and surpasses it in some minor ways. Here is a straightforward table comparing some of the features of the cameras. https://photographylife.com/nikon-z8-vs-canon-eos-r5-ii. It is likely that the R5II will have superior AF (yet to be determined, though more AF points), RAW pre-capture (only one setting, 0.5 sec), better EVF, faster ES (30 FPS) and perhaps longer recording time. It still suffers from a smaller and poorer buffering methodology (camera locks up until buffer clears rather than slowing down like Nikon) and has a low pass filter. What remains to be determined are the battery life, AF in video, overheating, etc. For a Nikon or Sony user, there would be no reason IMHO to switch other than if someone gifted you bodies/lenses.
 
You don't really need to figure out the Z8, as the R5II is catching up and surpasses it in some minor ways. Here is a straightforward table comparing some of the features of the cameras. https://photographylife.com/nikon-z8-vs-canon-eos-r5-ii. It is likely that the R5II will have superior AF (yet to be determined, though more AF points), RAW pre-capture (only one setting, 0.5 sec), better EVF, faster ES (30 FPS) and perhaps longer recording time. It still suffers from a smaller and poorer buffering methodology (camera locks up until buffer clears rather than slowing down like Nikon) and has a low pass filter. What remains to be determined are the battery life, AF in video, overheating, etc. For a Nikon or Sony user, there would be no reason IMHO to switch other than if someone gifted you bodies/lenses.
Ok I see, No I'm not planning on switching but selling my Z8 to purchase the R5II did pass my mind but can't seem to do it.
 
I don’t think still photography is going to go away in advertising and marketing but would agree the current trend is towards more video. Sometimes a still image is able to capture a more powerful meaning, other times video so it really depends on message.

What I don’t understand is the expectation that stills will come from video. You’re not the only person I have seen post this. Maybe you can explain how this will occur. From my experience, in stills you generally want a crisp, sharp image without motion blur with some obvious exceptions. In video, you generally want a smooth flow that is appealing to the eye which generally means a little motion blur to each frame. If you were to shoot a faster shutter to freeze the action for a still image you end up with a more jittery look to the video. You can shoot more frames per second and increase your shutter speed but it seems a lot of research shows people prefer around 24-30fps range. With vertical video becoming a thing, maybe jittery video will become the new norm too 🤷‍♂️
Still photography from Video footage is it the future..............

I don't know how its evolving technically by camera manufactures but it seems to be a direction - objective emerging that will only be developed further and further as have many of the hybrid camera features we see today.

Today needing a high level of personal Skill sets for still photography is becoming less and less a important necessity given the features of new cameras that keep doing so much more automatically.

What this does in many ways is basically make progressively traditional photographers with long earned honed skill sets over time going forward more the minority, while birthing a new style of videography - hybrid photography more New players new ways for far more people i guess.

The industry is opening itself up to engaging or attracting the greater majority of the new generation users we call videographers - hybrid photographers = (new growth market)
many of these new users were raised on smart phones, these new videographers hybrid photographers are often virtually organically highly software skilled to drive a tool -
ie: hybrid video camera to do almost everything they want from framing the area, and letting the tool do the tracking capture, connection sharing mostly all automatically.

The mother ship being the internet platforms determines the direction users will grow into and manufacturers will simply follow, i call it the food chain syndrome, manufacturers read then follow the trend and adapt accordingly.

Sadly as Video killed the radio star Video will kill the still image star. That doesn't mean Radio or Still photography will be forgotten, well not completely, we will simply express
ourselves differently.

A smart phone you can take a video and click you have a still shot in your album, they can both be in your inbox within moments, this is also a direction Canon is heading as are others especially for good reason, adapting to survive and grow.

You see the phone camera industry can get into the big three camera companies business but the big three camera companies cant necessarily get into the phone business, well with the exception being Sony which has a small industry foot print.

Some hybrid cameras today already take some stills from video.

The 5 d mkII produces a 7 mb still from video, i hear its not the ultimate outcome but nor was 3 d tracking in the beginning.

I hear some stills from 8 k video have been worked as 30mb stills with incredible outcomes using the Z9 how i don't know.

In playback mode with the video paused, you can scroll through the video frame-by-frame and select the exact image you want. Then hit the "i" button and select "save current frame". You'll get a JPEG matching the resolution of your video - so ~8MP in 4K and ~33MP in 8K.24 Mar 2022


Its all only an observation of direction, add to this A i features and things will be interesting going forward.


Only an opinion
 
Last edited:
Still from video is already doable right now. This shot from over 3 years ago taken with my R5 and RF800 f11 lens. I made a jpg from video, then cropped and tweaked it. One of my favorite photos. But everything has to be just right for a decent image. I don't pull many from video because it usually is not that great.

DRJ_6417_1523-2 John Hay Eagle and Eaglet 4.9.21 cropped by David Johnson, on Flickr
 
Back
Top