Would you buy The Canon R1 if it were 85MP

Leigh A. Wax wrote:

Canon has since the time of the EOS 1 prioritized the "1" series line to the needs of professional, photojournalist Sports & Action shooters,

As a  professional sports photographer I want increased resolution.  Better than the R5 and Z9 in the R1. Double the resolution of the 1DXMKIII

and fast-forward to the DSLR, they added a 2nd pro-quality line, the "5" series, prioritized to the needs of Landscape, and Studio shooters.

The pro sports/action folks prioritize speed, & AF accuracy far above pixel resolution;

The R5 and Z9 focus fine.  The best shots out of Tokyo were from R5's.   There are no excuses left to cripple the R1.

whereas the Landscape / studio folks prioritize resolution.

Sports, sports action portrature, fashion, runway, BIF, All should be able to be shot with the R1.

That should have satisfied both groups, and we don't hear the Landscape / Studio shooters griping that their "5" series cameras have too much resolution, curbing it's Action shooting ability, but there seems to be an abundant number of senseless, resolution obsessed Landscape /Studio shooters who think every Camera should be prioritized for them, and no one else.:-(

A good camera able to be used for various genres should be sold at a premium to professionals.

If amateurs don't want to spend 10K on lenses and bodies that's OK.   Some of us pay over $40K for bodies.  The R1's time has come.   Canon needs to make sure the roll-out is flawless.

UZI2D30 wrote:

It is unfortunate that you chose to overlook actual history. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Canon changed their strategy in 2011 with the very expensive release of the merged high-megapixel 1DS and fast 1D (1.3x crop) bodies, aka the 1DX. Square what you just wrote with Canon's actual timeline.

Basically they have been milking the "professional body" and not following through on their stated goal: "The Canon EOS-1D X is the latest in the company's professional range of DSLRs. Its job is to replace both the sports-orientated 1D series and the high-resolution, studio-focused 1DS range of cameras."

Remember when the sports-oriented 1D series was priced in the 5000 range? Yeah, me either. Hopefully those days are coming back with the release of the R1 and R3.

I think I paid over $7,000 in NYC for my first 1DX.

For a proper R1, glad to pay 10K in 2021 or 2022.

85MP at 15fps

• bluevellet wrote:

read title

How about double the resolution of the 1DXMKIII?

Leigh A. Wax wrote:

If Canon were to prioritize the "1" series to a mega 85 MP body, Nikon exec's would be "dancing in the streets" as within a year all those Canon "big whites" that have dominated sporting events for decades will have descended into the dust bin of history as "once upon a time".

The big whites are on SONY, FUJI and Canon cameras everywhere you look.

As for a camera that allows you to shoot at 85 MP or to adjust your file size to shoot at 20 or 6 MP, how does the latitude scare you? How would it scare the other professional sports photographers I work with? Every person I've spoken to who puts food on the table has told me that they would LOVE to shoot at 85MP or adjust to 20MP as longe as they could maintain 15fps.

What "people did for decades" is fine. They used to ride horses to work and put leeches on their bodies.

The next Canon that even comes close to that will be the R5s/r, similar to the 5ds/r.

Will Canon get 10K for the body?

Anyone that thinks different, is living in "La La Land', though that's not too bad a place to be, as "they say", "ignorance is bliss"

Horses and Leeches

DigitalAmnesia wrote:

Leigh A. Wax wrote:

If Canon were to prioritize the "1" series to a mega 85 MP body, Nikon exec's would be "dancing in the streets" as within a year all those Canon "big whites" that have dominated sporting events for decades will have descended into the dust bin of history as "once upon a time".

The next Canon that even comes close to that will be the R5s/r, similar to the 5ds/r.

Anyone that thinks different, is living in "La La Land', though that's not too bad a place to be, as "they say", "ignorance is bliss"

I have the Canon FD 300mm f/2.8 and it is sharp even with a 1.4x TC on the R5 stopped down to f/5.6 or so. I mean it's actually *sharp*. At f/4 it is softer but still sharpens up easily in post. Wide open it is hazy and a bit soft. I have heard people say that the very first EF super telephotos were not all razor sharp but after that everything was razor sharp... My guess is most of the "big whites" will work great on an R5 and probably be sharp when stopped down a full stop at 85MP.

You are correct.   The Tokyo Olympics are proof.  The shots were amazing from R5's with big whites.  According to my friends and CPS the R5's took a real beating not intended for the knocks. Actual camera mounts were breaking off and the adapters used were cracking lenses at the 52mm flange.

Bottom line....  A 85MP R1 will not have any of these issues and probably will be even more sturdy than the current IDXMKIII's.

1Dx4me wrote:

tvstaff wrote:

Leigh A. Wax wrote:

Canon has since the time of the EOS 1 prioritized the "1" series line to the needs of professional, photojournalist Sports & Action shooters,

As a professional sports photographer I want increased resolution. Better than the R5 and Z9 in the R1. Double the resolution of the 1DXMKIII

and fast-forward to the DSLR, they added a 2nd pro-quality line, the "5" series, prioritized to the needs of Landscape, and Studio shooters.

The pro sports/action folks prioritize speed, & AF accuracy far above pixel resolution;

The R5 and Z9 focus fine. The best shots out of Tokyo were from R5's. There are no excuses left to cripple the R1.

whereas the Landscape / studio folks prioritize resolution.

Sports, sports action portrature, fashion, runway, BIF, All should be able to be shot with the R1.

That should have satisfied both groups, and we don't hear the Landscape / Studio shooters griping that their "5" series cameras have too much resolution, curbing it's Action shooting ability, but there seems to be an abundant number of senseless, resolution obsessed Landscape /Studio shooters who think every Camera should be prioritized for them, and no one else.:-(

A good camera able to be used for various genres should be sold at a premium to professionals.

If amateurs don't want to spend 10K on lenses and bodies that's OK. Some of us pay over $40K for bodies. The R1's time has come. Canon needs to make sure the roll-out is flawless.

+1

very reasonable, Tony!

Thank you for that. I do believe, my request is reasonable and modest.  Canon is more than up to the task.  What agency would not buy multiple copies for all of their photographers?   Including some exciting new glass.

It would also edge SONY, Nikon and Fuji away from their most profitable. areas with the highest margins.    A single broadcast lens can cost $250,000 USD.   Canon is a eco-system that exists systemically in the largest purchasers of media equipment in the world.   There is.much more at stake than letting your competitors get in through a side door to chip away at that ecosystem.

The R1 will be more important than most consumers or photographers know, based on the importance of Canon remaining dominant in direct and peripheral assimilation and dissemination across multiple platforms for multinational media concerns. From the field, production, to the truck, NOC and into consumer homes globally.  No need for the weakest link to be one that disturbs this dominance.

John Sheehy wrote:

Leigh A. Wax wrote:

Canon has since the time of the EOS 1 prioritized the "1" series line to the needs of professional, photojournalist Sports & Action shooters, and fast-forward to the DSLR, they added a 2nd pro-quality line, the "5" series, prioritized to the needs of Landscape, and Studio shooters.

The pro sports/action folks prioritize speed, & AF accuracy far above pixel resolution; whereas the Landscape / studio folks prioritize resolution.

That should have satisfied both groups, and we don't hear the Landscape / Studio shooters griping that their "5" series cameras have too much resolution, curbing it's Action shooting ability, but there seems to be an abundant number of senseless, resolution obsessed Landscape /Studio shooters who think every Camera should be prioritized for them, and no one else.:-(

What is the R3, then? It sounds like everything anyone could expect for a fast, rugged, modest-res camera. Sounds like a camera for that niche. It seems awfully greedy for people who want that type of camera to want Canon's next big release to be another low-res, fast-shooting camera, while there's still nothing from Canon over 45MP, except the older 5Ds(r).

A lot of this talk sounds like tribalism to me; the fast, low-res tribe and the hires tribe both want to possess the camera position that Canon calls their "Flagship", when all that should really matter is that Canon tries to address the needs of everyone, as best they can, with as few bodies as is possible, to avoid R&D waste.

Yes and only Canon have the feedback from their curstomers and professionnal photographers, so they know better than us what way they have to follow, within economical constraints of course.