The R1 and R5 mk II is really messing with my head

[raffas]

I went all in with mirrorless, selling my dslr's when the R3 came out and was waiting for an R1 for a long time. Everyone was kind of expecting something more from it, myself included. I just wish it had a 32-35 mp sensor and MAYBE a global shutter, but it really does seem like the R5 has everything the R1 does and a little more. The only thing stopping me from getting the R5 is the smaller body, no touch AF controller, the overheating (even with the battery grip vent), and the LP E6 Batteries (they just aren't that good compared to LP E19's). I also used the original R5 and returned it after a few weeks because it kind of fell short. I do a lot of weddings, more video than photos sometimes, so the video features are nice, but the R1 would have been my main shooter for both photo and video but again, it just feels like a R3 update. Getting the R5, plus the vent grip, PLUS 8 BATTERIES (all the old LP E6's wont be as good) it would be $1,000 less than the R1 too. Money isn't the issue for since it's for work, but dude I really agree with the sentiment that it doesn't FEEL like a flagship body, especially when compared to Sony or Nikon. I already have my pre order for the R1 in since last night, but I've never second guessed myself on camera gear ever. Maybe someone here can help me make up my mind.

[wq9nsc]

The R1 may well NOT be the best camera for your use.  For most of the life of the 1 series, the bodies were optimized for sports shooters and photo journalists where prime considerations were rugged weather resistance, high performance (particularly in low light), and hitting the "sweet spot" for resolution and speed with the target output of journalism in mind.  The S suffix subset of the 1 series was a short term marketing attempt to provide a 1 series body with higher resolution for "studio" use.

For weddings and similar events, I would choose a 5 over a 1 series.  My primary use is sports and I will never shoot a wedding so I love the 1 series.  But I am not in love with mirrorless and although I MAY try a R1 via CPS somewhere down the road, I am about to order one additional 1DX III body while they are still available.  I never shoot video with anything but a camcorder so that aspect of mirrorless architecture doesn't matter to me.  I am curious how the R1 sensor noise will do in sustained low light sports shooting where the sensor is going to be in high active mode for long periods of time (since it can't be in a low res mode if the pre-capture buffer is going to be fully utilized).  I also want to test how real battery life compares to my 1DX III, currently I can easily shoot a couple of major events between charges on 1DX bodies and don't worry about having to change batteries during events. 

There isn't any single camera that is best for everything.  A camera that excels at sports isn't going to be the best choice for portraiture.  A medium format camera is going to produce images that "standard" bodies can't but it won't provide the frame rate needed for many applications.  So the "flagship" isn't going to be the right solution to a lot of issues.  I own four vehicles and each gets me from point A to B but they definitely aren't direct subs for one another.  My Corvette Z06 is a lot of fun to drive but it would be useless for big loads or deep snow where my crewcab diesel pickup comes into its own.  And neither would make a good daily driver.  There are no perfect people and no perfect camera systems 🙂

Rodger

[kvbarkley]

Ken Rockwell agrees:

"Honestly I'm having a hard time figuring out if anything really is significantly new in the R1 compared to the R3 (it's the exact same body and both have mind-reading AF and touch sensor scrolling!), and while everyone is complimenting themselves on how well they can understand and use words and concepts like deep learning and prescient machine cognition. [snip] I'd order an R3 unless you're a full-time pro and something the R1 does will genuinely help you bag more selling shots. Otherwise it seems the R1 is also just a slight upgrade to the R3, with more flowery PR. I've been doing this many decades, even 40 years ago every new AF system was heralded as God's gift to humanity for what ultimately were negligeable changes. If you want either of these, order now as I don't know for how long B&H will be fire-selling the R3."

[Tronhard]

Calling ANY camera a 'flagship' model is a loaded term when used without context.  It will mean different things to those operating in different genres.

It is clear that Canon have decided that the market segment that this applies to for the R1 is the sports, journalism and news industries - which are the markets that have always historically dominated this model, so that should be no surprise  Now, the R3 has been holding that line for a while, but perhaps history is repeating itself where the Canon 3 film camera came out for a while in 1998 and then nothing followed. 

When one looks critically at the 1D series, they always had sensors in the 20-24MP +/- range, so that should not be a surprise.  What news and sports want is fantastic focus, tracking, low light, and smaller files because they want to fire them off in real time to their agencies - hence the built-in connectivity.  Agencies don't want enormous files to populate web pages or print in magazines, books or papers. So a large sensor is a feature that has no benefit  and thus no value to them;  a smaller MP sensor with fewer, larger photosites that works in dim conditions does, however.

For those who wanted more resolution and a more general-purpose camera, the R5 was always that flagship model.  That has historically been the camera of choice for general-purpose work: commercial product, landscape, portrait, wildlife, fashion, weddings and social events.

In terms of video, the R5 was (IMHO) a victim of poor marketing when it came out   It was an excellent example of over-promising and under-delivering and that has become a hang-up for consumers that lingers on.  Far too much concentration on the video performance that gave a false impression that this was a pro-grade video camera - really it was a brilliant stills unit, that did a reasonable job at video too. 

Canon managed to up the performance of the R5 in terms of heat management via firmware, and brought out the R5C for a more video-centric market.  I would not be bowled over if Canon releases a new version of that model at some stage.

It is clear that the R5II is more the 'general purpose' flagship, and has significant improvements in terms of video, but it's a significant performer for stills in a wide range of applications  - it shares the features of focus and tracking, and processing with the R1 - the big difference is resolution. 

I think any claim that the R5II has heating issues is a speculative judgement at this stage, considering no-one that I am aware of has actually had full production models to play with for any reasonable length of time.  It has new standard venting systems built into the body, and one can choose the fan option for a battery grip, but again can use a different grip for stills.   If you need a specialist video camera then I recommend buying one - get the right tool for the job, that's why they make them.

I would expect a wedding professional to be taking at least two cameras to a shoot, so if using 2 x R5II units, one could have the venting grip and be the video unit (or use the R5C); while the other body uses the standard grip for stills, or even use the excellent R6II.

  I am seeing reviews that consider the new series the best autofocus out there - especially features such as recording a series of faces and prioritizing them for focus/tracking in crowds.  You can log the bride and groom or other notables and let the camera make them the literal focus of the imagery - that is amazingly powerful!

On the other hand, if you prefer another brand's offering, that is why we have competition, to give you choice but be careful - there is a cost to switching brands.

[JFG]

raffas,

I feel for you, trying to justify spending US$ 6,300.00 plus tax for the new R1, could be one of those things that would keep me awake.  The one caveat you have is that it is for work and in the long run it will pay for itself, not to mention the tax deduction.  Although the improvements from the R3 to R1, to you, may not seem enough to others may be justifiable, depending on their needs.  You mentioned that even though you feel this way, you went ahead and pre-ordered the new R1.  From what I can see in the canon comparison chart (R1 compared to R3), canon has made improvements in the following areas:   FPS, ISO range, IS system, Imaging processor, Image processor, and LCD size Vari/Angle (there may be other areas that I overlooked).  It would be nice if, once you got your R1, you could come back and post your findings and your thoughts about the R1 and your comparison to your R3.  It's hard for me to believe that Canon introduced the new R1 as their new "Flagship Camera" without really making any significant improvements from the R3.  I look forward to seeing your comparison and reading your thoughts after you've had the opportunity to actually experience the R1.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and those may be helpful to Canon for future improvements.  Looking at a car is not the same as test driving it !    : )