What would you want CFexpress or SD cards for the next batch of Cameras?

Droster wrote:

ilumo wrote:

Two CFexpress cards all the way. Especially for those that want to write raws simultaneously for redundancy. I would never want to write to a single card anymore. Especially after having a lexar card fail on me recently. I guess once bitten twice shy?

that said having one fast and one slow card sucks. That most likely Means you’ll be limited to the speed of the slowest card when writing raws to both. On the Sony it’s super annoying in that you can’t review pictures, change settings etc until the buffers are cleared. I don’t know how the canon behaves. If it’s like the former then the faster the card the better.

The way I see Canon do it, the lower "crippled" $1400~$2000 (your RP and R) bodies will get single SD, the middle tier $3k-$4k bodies (R5 and R6) will get CFexpress + SD, and only the very top flagship, the eventual successor to the 1Dx will get double CFexpress.

Well gee, that was an easy prediction for the R and the RP. BTW do you drive  a "crippled" car or do insist on only the flagship of the Mercedes line? I guess other than tents and sleeping bags just about everything I own must be crippled somehow.

The Bad Photographer wrote:

Droster wrote:

ilumo wrote:

Two CFexpress cards all the way. Especially for those that want to write raws simultaneously for redundancy. I would never want to write to a single card anymore. Especially after having a lexar card fail on me recently. I guess once bitten twice shy?

that said having one fast and one slow card sucks. That most likely Means you’ll be limited to the speed of the slowest card when writing raws to both. On the Sony it’s super annoying in that you can’t review pictures, change settings etc until the buffers are cleared. I don’t know how the canon behaves. If it’s like the former then the faster the card the better.

The way I see Canon do it, the lower "crippled" $1400~$2000 (your RP and R) bodies will get single SD, the middle tier $3k-$4k bodies (R5 and R6) will get CFexpress + SD, and only the very top flagship, the eventual successor to the 1Dx will get double CFexpress.

Well gee, that was an easy prediction for the R and the RP. BTW do you drive a "crippled" car or do insist on only the flagship of the Mercedes line? I guess other than tents and sleeping bags just about everything I own must be crippled somehow.

Hmm... you need a house and proper bed!

stevvi wrote:

RDKirk wrote:

I don't expect two CFexpress slots to happen in the R5, however, because Canon Inc considers the R5 to be an "enthusiast" camera, not a professional camera. Canon Inc recognizes only the 1-series as their professional camera.

See my comment above. Canon UK describes the R5 as "Professional mirrorless redefined" and "A professional full frame mirrorless flagship camera offering photographers and filmmakers a host of ground-breaking new features."

That said, some enthusiasts needs are more than some professionals. Some professionals are terrible photographers, and some enthusiasts are great. "Professional" seems to be a word that thrown about by anyone and everyone these days.

If someone earns a good percentage of their living from photography then they are professional whether they are good or not. I know two photo pros whose work photography is boring but they are great enthusiast artists in their free time but they don't make much money from their beautiful photos. I also know people earning money from bad photos that even I could do better. They get out and sell, that's part of being pro. But still they earn so they are professional.

For awhile I saw a lot of people with Rebels(!) trying to be (at least part time) professional photographers. I think smartphones have killed any of those hopes.

I don't know if something gets lost in translation but Canon Japan does call the 1 series their only true pro camera, I think by that they mean no compromises. They don't apologize for the size, weight, price either.

In any case enthusiasts buy way more cameras than pros.

stevvi wrote:

The Bad Photographer wrote:

Droster wrote:

ilumo wrote:

Two CFexpress cards all the way. Especially for those that want to write raws simultaneously for redundancy. I would never want to write to a single card anymore. Especially after having a lexar card fail on me recently. I guess once bitten twice shy?

that said having one fast and one slow card sucks. That most likely Means you’ll be limited to the speed of the slowest card when writing raws to both. On the Sony it’s super annoying in that you can’t review pictures, change settings etc until the buffers are cleared. I don’t know how the canon behaves. If it’s like the former then the faster the card the better.

The way I see Canon do it, the lower "crippled" $1400~$2000 (your RP and R) bodies will get single SD, the middle tier $3k-$4k bodies (R5 and R6) will get CFexpress + SD, and only the very top flagship, the eventual successor to the 1Dx will get double CFexpress.

Well gee, that was an easy prediction for the R and the RP. BTW do you drive a "crippled" car or do insist on only the flagship of the Mercedes line? I guess other than tents and sleeping bags just about everything I own must be crippled somehow.

Hmm... you need a house and proper bed!

Ha! I worked at an outdoors shop for 17 years and acquired way more top of the line gear than I need. Other than this stuff that was highly discounted through pro deals I usually have to compromise on the quality of my purchases.

Dan W wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

SD for me. Every camera I own uses them and I have no desire for adding another card type. Nikon probably lost out on a potential customer by ONLY using XQD cards in the Z cameras. I was initially favoring them over an R even though I had EF lenses already. I do no photography that cannot be handled by a SD card so why would I want to needlessly complicate my life? Hope Canon realizes this.

I agree with you because I don't use video, just stills. But for the 8K video it may require much faster cards that can't be achieved with todays SD cards. I'm suspecting we will see Cfexpress needed because of that. They are crazy expensive but so was SD at one time. As they become more popular the price will drop. I have only 2 cards I carry with me for my R, a 128gb in camera and a 64gb as backup. The 128gb holds over a 1000 RAWs, I'll never shoot that without a chance to off load the card to my locals and cloud. So if the R having 2 slots, I would buy 2 large cards and set camera to record to both cards in RAW so I have a built in backup. Thats what I did with my 5D3.

If the rumor mill is to be believed, the R5 will have one of each:

https://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-eos-r5-will-have-an-sd-cfexpress-slot-cr2/

I guess one possibility for still shooters who want to use two slots for mission critical applications would be to buy one high capacity CFE card and leave it in the camera mostly, using their existing collection of SD's for transfer. If this is the arrangement that we get, I am interested in how people will use it.

stevvi wrote:

From Canon Uk's web site:

Headline: "Canon EOS R5 Professional mirrorless redefined"

"Canon Inc. announces the development of the EOS R5. A professional full frame mirrorless flagship camera offering photographers and filmmakers a host of ground-breaking new features."

Notice, please, that I explicitly said "Canon Inc." That's Canon in Japan. The regional subsidiaries market what Canon Inc designs and delivers to them however they feel they need to for their areas. What Canon Inc designs, however, is in accordance with the Japanese corporate directors' view of their products.

Which is this:

https://photorumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Canon-latest-financial-results2.png

stevvi wrote:

RDKirk wrote:

In my work, I don't reformat a card until I've delivered the job to the client. That's a hard and fast rule that has saved my butt more than once.

That means I maintain a lot of cards. Having to add half a dozen or a dozen CFexpress cards to the cost of buying an R5 will keep me from buying it. I'll just continue on with my EOS R bodies.

I've found over the decades that trying to "future proof" memory is a fool's game. I tried that with my first digital camera, which took SmartMedia cards. Before I could "grow into" the "future proofed" cards, the entire camera memory game changed and SmartMedia was obsolete.

I'd get an R5 if it had dual slots, one SD and one CFexpress, but not if it has two CFexpress cards.

I don't expect two CFexpress slots to happen in the R5, however, because Canon Inc considers the R5 to be an "enthusiast" camera, not a professional camera. Canon Inc recognizes only the 1-series as their professional camera.

See my comment above. Canon UK describes the R5 as "Professional mirrorless redefined" and "A professional full frame mirrorless flagship camera offering photographers and filmmakers a host of ground-breaking new features."

See my response to your comment above.

That said, some enthusiasts needs are more than some professionals. Some professionals are terrible photographers, and some enthusiasts are great. "Professional" seems to be a word that thrown about by anyone and everyone these days.

Canon Inc (Japan) makes its design decisions according to their dictionary.

The Bad Photographer wrote:

Droster wrote:

ilumo wrote:

Two CFexpress cards all the way. Especially for those that want to write raws simultaneously for redundancy. I would never want to write to a single card anymore. Especially after having a lexar card fail on me recently. I guess once bitten twice shy?

that said having one fast and one slow card sucks. That most likely Means you’ll be limited to the speed of the slowest card when writing raws to both. On the Sony it’s super annoying in that you can’t review pictures, change settings etc until the buffers are cleared. I don’t know how the canon behaves. If it’s like the former then the faster the card the better.

The way I see Canon do it, the lower "crippled" $1400~$2000 (your RP and R) bodies will get single SD, the middle tier $3k-$4k bodies (R5 and R6) will get CFexpress + SD, and only the very top flagship, the eventual successor to the 1Dx will get double CFexpress.

Well gee, that was an easy prediction for the R and the RP. BTW do you drive a "crippled" car or do insist on only the flagship of the Mercedes line? I guess other than tents and sleeping bags just about everything I own must be crippled somehow.

Hold your outrage horses, I’m on your side. I explicitly used the “ signs because of how frequently people overly misuse that term.

David Hull wrote:

If the rumor mill is to be believed, the R5 will have one of each:

https://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-eos-r5-will-have-an-sd-cfexpress-slot-cr2/

I reported this link yesterday it's the most "reliable" source of rumors for canon users

I guess one possibility for still shooters who want to use two slots for mission critical applications would be to buy one high capacity CFE card and leave it in the camera mostly, using their existing collection of SD's for transfer. If this is the arrangement that we get, I am interested in how people will use it.

I'll use CFE for raw and SD for jpeg or heif , also the CFE will  be used for 8k and 4k and the SD for 2k proxy, let's hope there is support for two video sizes simultaneously, I'll bet it will be this way as 8k is too much today for most users.

jwilliams wrote:

Dan W wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

SD for me. Every camera I own uses them and I have no desire for adding another card type. Nikon probably lost out on a potential customer by ONLY using XQD cards in the Z cameras. I was initially favoring them over an R even though I had EF lenses already. I do no photography that cannot be handled by a SD card so why would I want to needlessly complicate my life? Hope Canon realizes this.

I agree with you because I don't use video, just stills. But for the 8K video it may require much faster cards that can't be achieved with todays SD cards. I'm suspecting we will see Cfexpress needed because of that. They are crazy expensive but so was SD at one time. As they become more popular the price will drop. I have only 2 cards I carry with me for my R, a 128gb in camera and a 64gb as backup. The 128gb holds over a 1000 RAWs, I'll never shoot that without a chance to off load the card to my locals and cloud. So if the R having 2 slots, I would buy 2 large cards and set camera to record to both cards in RAW so I have a built in backup. Thats what I did with my 5D3.

I wish Canon or someone would come up with a camera completely devoid of video functions. I don't need that for PHOTOGRAPHS. Also I have to laugh at reviews that say camera x is better than camera y because it does 20 fps vs 10 fps. I doubt even people shooting sports need that, and if they do, I pity them having to sort thru all those photos trying to find the good one to publish. From a speed and throughput perspective cameras have long eclipsed any speed limit I could use. I just want to take photos in as simple and straightforward manner as possible. 90% (at least) of the stuff on modern cameras just gets in the way for me. I'm probably in the minority though.

I would question how much cost would be saved by removing the video features.

David Hull wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

Dan W wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

SD for me. Every camera I own uses them and I have no desire for adding another card type. Nikon probably lost out on a potential customer by ONLY using XQD cards in the Z cameras. I was initially favoring them over an R even though I had EF lenses already. I do no photography that cannot be handled by a SD card so why would I want to needlessly complicate my life? Hope Canon realizes this.

I agree with you because I don't use video, just stills. But for the 8K video it may require much faster cards that can't be achieved with todays SD cards. I'm suspecting we will see Cfexpress needed because of that. They are crazy expensive but so was SD at one time. As they become more popular the price will drop. I have only 2 cards I carry with me for my R, a 128gb in camera and a 64gb as backup. The 128gb holds over a 1000 RAWs, I'll never shoot that without a chance to off load the card to my locals and cloud. So if the R having 2 slots, I would buy 2 large cards and set camera to record to both cards in RAW so I have a built in backup. Thats what I did with my 5D3.

I wish Canon or someone would come up with a camera completely devoid of video functions. I don't need that for PHOTOGRAPHS. Also I have to laugh at reviews that say camera x is better than camera y because it does 20 fps vs 10 fps. I doubt even people shooting sports need that, and if they do, I pity them having to sort thru all those photos trying to find the good one to publish. From a speed and throughput perspective cameras have long eclipsed any speed limit I could use. I just want to take photos in as simple and straightforward manner as possible. 90% (at least) of the stuff on modern cameras just gets in the way for me. I'm probably in the minority though.

I would question how much cost would be saved by removing the video features.

I believe it’s a sunk cost. How much can you save by removing gps from any modern automobile infotainment center?

David Hull wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

I wish Canon or someone would come up with a camera completely devoid of video functions. I don't need that for PHOTOGRAPHS. Also I have to laugh at reviews that say camera x is better than camera y because it does 20 fps vs 10 fps. I doubt even people shooting sports need that, and if they do, I pity them having to sort thru all those photos trying to find the good one to publish. From a speed and throughput perspective cameras have long eclipsed any speed limit I could use. I just want to take photos in as simple and straightforward manner as possible. 90% (at least) of the stuff on modern cameras just gets in the way for me. I'm probably in the minority though.

I would question how much cost would be saved by removing the video features.

There is some licensing to be paid for h264 and h256 encoding (2$ 3$ or less, and maybe the cost is already "embedded" in the chipset you are going to use in your camera anyway), the ability to have videos is required if you want live view from your mirrorless camera, so not much to save from the coding part of their  programmers, other than that it will be a dumb and stupid move (from Canon or anyone else)  not  to include video in a "photo camera" today, the ones that will do are going to charge you much more just for that niche feature of not having video and for sure are going to sell million of  cameras less than Canon, just like the Leica m10 mono

RDKirk wrote:

stevvi wrote:

RDKirk wrote:

In my work, I don't reformat a card until I've delivered the job to the client. That's a hard and fast rule that has saved my butt more than once.

That means I maintain a lot of cards. Having to add half a dozen or a dozen CFexpress cards to the cost of buying an R5 will keep me from buying it. I'll just continue on with my EOS R bodies.

I've found over the decades that trying to "future proof" memory is a fool's game. I tried that with my first digital camera, which took SmartMedia cards. Before I could "grow into" the "future proofed" cards, the entire camera memory game changed and SmartMedia was obsolete.

I'd get an R5 if it had dual slots, one SD and one CFexpress, but not if it has two CFexpress cards.

I don't expect two CFexpress slots to happen in the R5, however, because Canon Inc considers the R5 to be an "enthusiast" camera, not a professional camera. Canon Inc recognizes only the 1-series as their professional camera.

See my comment above. Canon UK describes the R5 as "Professional mirrorless redefined" and "A professional full frame mirrorless flagship camera offering photographers and filmmakers a host of ground-breaking new features."

See my response to your comment above.

That said, some enthusiasts needs are more than some professionals. Some professionals are terrible photographers, and some enthusiasts are great. "Professional" seems to be a word that thrown about by anyone and everyone these days.

Canon Inc (Japan) makes its design decisions according to their dictionary.

Seen & thanks. I'm in the UK so I guess the R5 will be a professional camera here

The Bad Photographer wrote:

stevvi wrote:

RDKirk wrote:

I don't expect two CFexpress slots to happen in the R5, however, because Canon Inc considers the R5 to be an "enthusiast" camera, not a professional camera. Canon Inc recognizes only the 1-series as their professional camera.

See my comment above. Canon UK describes the R5 as "Professional mirrorless redefined" and "A professional full frame mirrorless flagship camera offering photographers and filmmakers a host of ground-breaking new features."

That said, some enthusiasts needs are more than some professionals. Some professionals are terrible photographers, and some enthusiasts are great. "Professional" seems to be a word that thrown about by anyone and everyone these days.

If someone earns a good percentage of their living from photography then they are professional whether they are good or not. I know two photo pros whose work photography is boring but they are great enthusiast artists in their free time but they don't make much money from their beautiful photos. I also know people earning money from bad photos that even I could do better. They get out and sell, that's part of being pro. But still they earn so they are professional.

For awhile I saw a lot of people with Rebels(!) trying to be (at least part time) professional photographers. I think smartphones have killed any of those hopes.

I think Digital has changed what a Professional is. Any swinging @ick ( sorry ladies) with a camera calls themselves a photographer now a days because they don't have to know anything. Just take a snap and chimp to see if it's any good. Back in the days of film you had to know photography. You had to know how to compose people, how to use exposure for the results you want and see light. You had to know a lot of the technical stuff that today so many people just say "I'll fix in photoshop". And don't forget spray and pray people lol. Come home with 2000 images hoping to get 30 or 40 good ones. Who could afford to do that with film??? Its really hard to make money nowadays in photography because you have so many aunts and uncles and friends willing to do a wedding or family shoot for free or next to nothing with a rebel and kit lens.

The ones that make it are exceptionally good as well as experts in post to make the images stand out. Again, post was not heavily used with film for the most part.

I don't know if something gets lost in translation but Canon Japan does call the 1 series their only true pro camera, I think by that they mean no compromises. They don't apologize for the size, weight, price either.

In any case enthusiasts buy way more cameras than pros.

Droster wrote:

The Bad Photographer wrote:

Droster wrote:

ilumo wrote:

Two CFexpress cards all the way. Especially for those that want to write raws simultaneously for redundancy. I would never want to write to a single card anymore. Especially after having a lexar card fail on me recently. I guess once bitten twice shy?

that said having one fast and one slow card sucks. That most likely Means you’ll be limited to the speed of the slowest card when writing raws to both. On the Sony it’s super annoying in that you can’t review pictures, change settings etc until the buffers are cleared. I don’t know how the canon behaves. If it’s like the former then the faster the card the better.

The way I see Canon do it, the lower "crippled" $1400~$2000 (your RP and R) bodies will get single SD, the middle tier $3k-$4k bodies (R5 and R6) will get CFexpress + SD, and only the very top flagship, the eventual successor to the 1Dx will get double CFexpress.

Well gee, that was an easy prediction for the R and the RP. BTW do you drive a "crippled" car or do insist on only the flagship of the Mercedes line? I guess other than tents and sleeping bags just about everything I own must be crippled somehow.

Hold your outrage horses, I’m on your side. I explicitly used the “ signs because of how frequently people overly misuse that term.

Yeah no doubt that term is way overused.

Dan W wrote:

The Bad Photographer wrote:

stevvi wrote:

RDKirk wrote:

I don't expect two CFexpress slots to happen in the R5, however, because Canon Inc considers the R5 to be an "enthusiast" camera, not a professional camera. Canon Inc recognizes only the 1-series as their professional camera.

See my comment above. Canon UK describes the R5 as "Professional mirrorless redefined" and "A professional full frame mirrorless flagship camera offering photographers and filmmakers a host of ground-breaking new features."

That said, some enthusiasts needs are more than some professionals. Some professionals are terrible photographers, and some enthusiasts are great. "Professional" seems to be a word that thrown about by anyone and everyone these days.

If someone earns a good percentage of their living from photography then they are professional whether they are good or not. I know two photo pros whose work photography is boring but they are great enthusiast artists in their free time but they don't make much money from their beautiful photos. I also know people earning money from bad photos that even I could do better. They get out and sell, that's part of being pro. But still they earn so they are professional.

For awhile I saw a lot of people with Rebels(!) trying to be (at least part time) professional photographers. I think smartphones have killed any of those hopes.

I think Digital has changed what a Professional is. Any swinging @ick ( sorry ladies) with a camera calls themselves a photographer now a days because they don't have to know anything. Just take a snap and chimp to see if it's any good. Back in the days of film you had to know photography. You had to know how to compose people, how to use exposure for the results you want and see light. You had to know a lot of the technical stuff that today so many people just say "I'll fix in photoshop". And don't forget spray and pray people lol. Come home with 2000 images hoping to get 30 or 40 good ones. Who could afford to do that with film??? Its really hard to make money nowadays in photography because you have so many aunts and uncles and friends willing to do a wedding or family shoot for free or next to nothing with a rebel and kit lens.

The ones that make it are exceptionally good as well as experts in post to make the images stand out. Again, post was not heavily used with film for the most part.

I think there's various ways of looking at this and I definitely fall on the side of "It's a wonderful thing that producing an acceptable quality of photo has been made *easily* available to the masses". I don't know anyone who would rather pay a small fortune to someone if they could get results they were happy with for free. Sure, that's a bit tough on people who make a living out of photography but, as you say, should only drive them to provide an even more unique and special service... if they can.

The one problem with all of this is, of course, that any old Tom, Dick or Harry can call themselves a "professional" these days and let the technology produce very reasonable results for them, and try to charge the ignorant punter a fortune for the service, but that seems to happen in many diverse areas anyway.