It wasn’t meant to be brutal, just how most people would see it. This seems fair to me since the clever advantages in focus, noise reduction and up scaling are useful but not headline grabbing...
It’s going to have better AF and probably better low light capabilities. That’s about it. Rather than that, it’s really nothing special, especially when you put it next to the R5 MKii and the R3.
@@mbismbismb How do you know he's a Sony fanboy? Can he not be a Canon user who was hoping for something more, like a high-res pro body for birds and wildlife? The way you Canon fans act like criticizing Canon is some crime against the almighty God is so strange.
Amazing how far ahead the Z9 was in 2021. I don’t think Nikon HQ is stressed at all with this R1 release. Let’s not forget the Z9 has more pixels but has the High Efficiency star RAW compression setting that makes those files the same size as 24mp files from Canon. And no need to AI upscale later. It’s already upscaled. This will be a really nice camera for Canon users though. I don’t see it attracting users from other brands however.
@@christof4105 More expensive than Z8, while Nikon also has far better telephoto lineup. "not enough for you?" This here is the red flag I was waiting for. It proves that you cannot think outside your own use case, and think that any argument is inherently egoistical. I'm referring to the lots and lots of wildlife shooters who want a high-res pro body, just like Z9. Because I'm able to think beyond myself. It wasn't about me personally.
@@fotografalexandernikolis You said there is no high mp body from canon. I just pointed out your lie. Not in the slightest i was talking about me or anything else you accused me of. If you disagree with me, attack my statement not me.
I've heard that the R3 was *always* the R3, it would be awfully hard to rebadge something halfway into mass production. I would almost argue the opposite, this sensor was developed as a potential R3 Mk II sensor, and the R1 project ran into some catastrophic issue with the sensor they planned to use, so the R3M2 sensor got put in the R1 body.
@@JMurph2015 that's very possible yes. But either way, it makes no sense to call the R3 an R3 and 3 years later the R1 an R1. They clearly belong to exactly the same line of cameras and the improved specs is exactly the kind of improvement we can expect in 3 years.
Yup - I am firmly in the "Sony A1 suprised the F out of Canon" camp. I love my R3, and would really like if they would bring a few updates like CLog2 to it, but I think we all have a strong sense that now that they can call the R3 Mark II the R1, there is no real reason for an R3 to exist. That is, up until (and IF) they choose to do global shutter. If so, my money is on that landing in an R3 II.
Z6 iii doesn't have anything like a 1/300 sec scan speed. IIRC it's closer to 1/70 sec. If you don't see what makes those two cameras fundamentally different for things like sports then you're not a potential R1 (or Z9, or A1) customer anyway. The more challenging comparisons are to the A9 III, which has the same resolution and an instantaneous global shutter, and to the Z9 and A1, which have E-shutters that are almost as fast with much higher resolution (and in the case of the A1 a mechanical shutter that is faster still). I use the A1, and can vouch for the continued usefulness of the mechanical shutter in weird indoor lighting. I think Nikon whiffed by abandoning mechanical shutters in their lineup. Only global shutters like the A9 III's can truly enable that.
Should've been called R3 mark ii. Like Chris said this is more of a niche camera. R1 should have been in a leauge of its own, a real flagship like the Nikon Z9 and Sony A1. Master of all trade, not just for sports and wildlife.
Realistically: - we will get a new firmware for Z8/Z9 within 2-3 weeks that will further improve the AF significantly and close the gap in such a way that it will be mostly irrelevant, if we are lucky we may get raw 30 fps, we will see, - Nikon's new cloud service (the first one to get it really right) will give them access to a very large database of images to train their ai algorithms and the progress is going to be significantly faster moving forward, - We will get a double Z9II announcement mid 2025. One will be based on a GS shutter sensor (either Sony or Red technology), the second one will be the logical successor of the Z9 with significant improvement in speed of operation. They will go at least 40 fps at 45mp and 2s pre-capture buffer. I expect also a brighter EVF like in the Z6III. - The Z8II will follow 6 months later.
@@bernardlanguillier7970 I really wanna see comparison of DD in photo and video between Z6 IIi and A9 III, because a lot of youtubers keep showing like "yeah, z6 iii has worse dd than other cameras"
@@quite1enough I work with the a9III and it's fine overall, no difference beyond ISO800, it's only base ISO that has limited DR, even compared to the Z6III.
@@mlai2546 What for? No global shutter? I'm better off with my R5c or even the R5! Pointless and R1 is NOT BREAKTHROUGH without Global Shutter. Huge disappointment.
Same here. As a former Canon user (1Dx Mark II) I got tired of waiting for Canon to come out with a pro body high mp camera and got the Nikon Z9 instead
Great preview, guys. This pretty much confirms the "R3 was supposed to be the R1 but the Sony A1 scared them" theories. This is 95% an R3 Mark II, but with better card slots. Sadly, as an R3 owner who is not a sports shooter, I don't see a whole lot of reasons why this would interest me. I really was hoping for a 50-60MP monster camera that would let me use the big LP-E19 batteries for wildlife shooting, but I guess that's not happening. Ah well, can't win them all. (Though the R5 II does look like it would be a good second body vs an R7 for wildlife...)
Yeah, this doesn't make sense. Specs, price ... everything is indicating that this is the second gen R3. Very curious to see the full review about this camera later on.
The R1 is selling for 7,5k € (that's with 19% sales tax included) where I'm from. That is an outrages price for the tech you get in that body, even for professional users.
Not to be a hater but it looks like the slight disappointment I thought it would be. They've rushed it out for the Olympics, and it just doesn't measure up as a flagship camera compared to the competition. We all know there'll be a Sony A1 MkII soon which will have incrementally better specs and double the megapixels. It's a tough sell. The R5 II looks a far more compelling camera.
Hard sell for amateurs & Instagramers who can’t decide between Sony Canon or Fuji? Canon is targeting pros who already have a ton of Canon pro lenses. Even a new pro. They know how to take amazing photos with these machines, Canon or Sony. They aren’t worried.
@@snowwalker9999 So basically, Canon are exploiting their market momentum to be lazy and release lesser specs for higher price, because they're "too big to fail, and the already invested customers have no other choice anyway". The fact that you are actually admitting to supporting such a distrustful business strategy speaks volumes. If Canon are so great, then that greatness by logic should be a reason to expect MORE of them, not as an excuse to expect less. The fact that fans like you excuse this laziness as if you're somehow benefitting from it, when in reality it's the complete opposite, is seriously zealously sect-like. Of course these bodies are great, but they're overpriced.
@@fotografalexandernikolis Canon has a camera for every level even every level content creators. This is a totally different camera targeting different crowd than the average consumers you’re talking about. I’m comparing apple with apple. Now when it comes to cameras for average consumers I agree, Canon isn’t the most thoughtful company. You could say they just don’t care. I’ve said it here on RUclips a couple of times shame on you canon. All I’m saying is that a professional doesn’t care about little things and I’m sure he or she would enjoy this camera.
@@fotografalexandernikolis Yep. I've responded to things like this forever. It's so wild that Canon fans will sit here and defend this. I've seen this argument for so long about how "pros for years have been shooting on 20mp cameras" but that was over a decade ago. Why sit here and settle for complacency and laziness? Why objectively handicap yourself in your creative workflow? It's mind boggling that people will sit here and defend this. Sure you can get good photos, but again you're objectively handicapping your workflow. It makes no sense. Completely agree with you.
@@jaegerschtulmann As a Canon only-buyer... I feel Canon has betrayed us with this piece of yesteryear. No Global Shutter, what are they thinking? At this point they are trying to ripoff people.
@@alansach8437 I have literally no idea what issues and am very curious. I always argue that Global Shutter should have been there a lot sooner. I thought Global Shutter is perfect. What disadvantages or problems technically as of now?
Canon's problem is they still have the mindset from the DSLR days where you could either have high frame rate or high megapixels. But Nikon showed that that Dichotomy is false by having their two high end cameras just be different form factors with the same internals... when all cameras can be fast and high megapixel, there's no reason for a low megapixel high fps camera to be the "top" of their lineup. Rather it should be priced below the flagship high mp high fps camera (R5ii, Z9, A1), maybe around £3000 max, and have all the specs of those but with lower megapixels for those who don't need the extra resolution (i.e. sports shooters). Then, you can round out the lineup with high and low resolution unstacked sensors for portrait/landscape/still life photographers who don't need high speed features, akin to the Z6 and Z7, at maybe £1500 and £2000 or something.
Completely agree. This is essentially Sonys lineup. A1 fast and high megapixels. A9iii low megapixel but obvious as fast as possible with global shutter. A7R high megapixels but not as fast. A7 hybrid camera middle of the road all rounder. A7S extremely low megapixels for low light and video (which will probably become obsolete as all cameras are getting better at low light and video)
@@mbismbismb since Canon is baking in NR in their raw files at base ISO, we have no idea how poor the sensor DR is... but if they developed in camera NR we can assume is still pretty bad. So there is no way to tell if the a9III is better or worse. Blame Canon for removing the possibility to shoot actual raw with their cameras.
Sony and Nikon broke the mold. Their flagship mirrorless cameras are high megapixel do-everything bodies that excel at everything. Canon was last to release theirs and it’s the worst. Same old sports/wildlife speed demon but not the best at anything else. Swing and a miss.
Are we comparing nikonz6lll vs Canon R1. People were complaining about z6III for 24 mp, Lol canon flagship(so called, long awaited, over hyped). z8, z9, least to mention z6III huge win for Nikon. Video 6k is a joke as well... Clearly canon has set their bar so low...
So, what does this camera have that the R5 II doesn’t ? - AF modes for basketball, football and volleyball - Faster sensor, but R5II sensor is still not slow. - 40 instead of 30 fps - traditionally for the 1D series a little more torque for autofocus... And that's it ? It seems we have come full circle and sports cameras no longer claim to be universal. The R5 II is truly a "top camera" here.
I really have to say that as a day-one adopter of the Z9 and as someone that has used it almost every day since then, the R1 is really kind of underwhelming. Personally I think the Z9 (and the A1/A9ii, for sure) have set the bar so high for the ultra-premium and professional mirrorless market that anything less than that is simply not a contender. The R1 edges out the Z9 in a couple of features but it's very surprising how many ways it falls short, at least in my opinion, especially given how much we expected from Canon after the R3 was released. I was absolutely betting on a 45+ megapixel sensor, 8K30+ video, and if I'm honest, a lot of the same or better features that already exist in other flagship-tier bodies. I can't help but think that Canon really misplayed their hand by splitting up what could have been an absolute juggernaut of a product, on par with or surpassing the Z9, by dividing up the best features of that product between the R1 and R5ii. My absolute favorite thing about the Z9 is that it can do ANYTHING. That is now the standard for this tier of product. And, like Chris, I just don't think the R1 is versatile enough to say the same, which is all the more confusing when it was pitched as a "jack of all trades, master of everything" camera.
I honestly don't see any reason to buy canon anymore, except if you already have expensive glass on hand. They're lagging behind and still very expensive.
@@Yupthereitismnah mate you are clueless really. I can understand the flash argument but for anything else the z8 is the superior camera. that said the R5 is fantastic but it is not a z8
This camera is 3yrs late. If it came out when z9 and a1 was released then it would e been relevant but sadly this camera is even more niche than a9iii.
I feel like, while it probably doesn’t actually matter, the fact that Canon’s flagships in the R1, R3 have lowish 24mp counts hurts in marketing. The competition Z8, Z9, a1 all have about double. And while in practice the difference is probably small, psychologically it just hurts. It’s just a bummer when the first number on the spec sheet is smaller. Or look at the OM-1; not in the same league, but there’s a lesson. Its stacked sensor had a lot of advantages over other Olympus cameras, but the same MP count, so the first impression was often that it wasn’t any better. While the old megapixel race is mostly kinda pointless, people still want to see the big number go up. That’s why the megapixel race got started in the first place. Even if this was a 26 or 28mp sensor compared to then 24mp of the R3 and R6 mark ii, I think that tiny bump would have a bigger impact on perception than the effect on images.
@@thebitterfig9903 I totally agree. Personally, even if the camera sensor was at 40mp, that is a failure. The Camera is competing with Sony’s 50mp and Nikon’s 45mp, not with the 1DX Mark III’s 20mp.
For eye control (on the R3 anyway) I’ve found that once you delete the profile (even when there isn’t one listed) and recalibrate a few times, it works almost flawlessly! If I’m not taking photos of subjects, I make sure to turn subject detection off (I have a button for this).
RUclips Tip: Always use your own merch on video. Especially cool ones with cool art. And always quickly mention “the cool merch” you’re using in the video and how people can get it. I believe in you 🤣
Yeah, most EOS 1D models (apart from the 1Ds series) were rather low resolution high-speed models for sports or harsh outdoor conditions. So it's not surprising to me the R1 is going a similar way. But I guess I can just as well live with my R6 Mark II, which may lack a few features but actually still has quite a lot of similar base specs.
Very curious why Canon’s execs decided on two products to serve the same market in the R3 and R1. In ways it might have been better brand perception wise vs Nikon and Sony for them to have delayed the R1 release to bring out a full featured throw everything at it model and quietly move this for a R3II or “R3S” instead. That the R1 became a mystical meme the better. That the A1Ii is out and still no R1. IMO almost everyone would have imagined the R1 like to be an all guns blazing halo model. Almost like a A1++ given the larger dual grip design. This being the R1 doesn’t help Canon show its really trading blows with Sony on the technology front like it did with Nikon back in the day. All these doesn’t stop the R1 from possibly being a capable and useful camera tool for its intended users but it doesn’t represent the confidence boost many are wanting from the brand. Their interesting lenses also need an exciting platform. R1II - complete overhaul. Go toe to toe with the A1II/III, Z9II/III with a halo product that shows this is what Canon R&D, design, manufacturing, user feedback can produce R3II: Sports, bring the R1 features to the R3II R6III: Baby R3II. Release with the R3II. Go toe to toe with A75; given IMO Sony dropped the ball on A74 coming from the incredible A73. R5III: Image quality + workflow. Be the preferred choice for commercial pros. Flash sync, tethering (wired and wireless), video, high resolution stills, remote shooting, flip+tilt rear screen, EVF and rear display quality and spec, IBIS, RAW histogram and playback etc as areas to focus on because these specs matter to pros and can help push the envelope on what they can deliver, especially vs “AI” software R8II: Value option for prosumers. Not approached as watered down, “cripple hammer” but designed from ground up to meet those needs. R7II: Baby R5II? Given there’s a VR lens for it. Makes sense for it to be an option for working pros on a smaller budget. IMO R7 should have been FF and Canon to develop both high end and price accessible lenses. But since it’s a APSC, maybe a RF to RF-S speedbooster + a set of zooms covering 24-150mm f3.2 FF equivalent? + reconfigure M series primes
I would contest the a74 being bad. It isn't, it's a camera with one of if not the best dr while having 33 mp. Sony never wanted it to be fast, only high quality, and it definately delivers on that
I'm convinced that the global shutter is a go to technology today if you are making a top tier sports camera today , this must become a new standard and be more affordable and wide spread, let's make companies know what we really want
Discussion for the Podcast: Do you think the R1 would have felt more like a flagship if it shared the sensor with the R5mkII? It would still have larger buffer, better battery life, better heat distribution, two cfexpress type-B card slots and so on. Maybe saving this sensor for a R3mkII. Do you think this means Canon is done with the R3 line, or maybe they will develop it into a global shutter like Sony did with the their a9 series? Thanks for your thoughts.
OMG it has 10% faster scan speed than a much cheaper camera that has double the megapixels... is anyone else not impressed by this spec? AI noise reduction on RAWs... Nooooooooooooo!!!!
@@IJAY2509am not seeing canon targeting you with this camera, else it would be £2500 maybe.. Its totally not targetted to you. There are people who really need a super fast and reliable camera in conditions normal people like you wont need. Its really a tank and i guess thats what you people dont realise here.. Ask a 1D war journalist how much there camera have been battered to the extremes, ask a sport photographer how fast they need to send exclusive pictures to their agency during the olympics. This isnt a prosumer camera.
@@sarbelv1lo Bro, this r 1 is Just a slightly better r3, call IT r3mk2 and the people would Not that disappointed about that Thing. Every Canon Body is build Like Tank. Even their also fresh released r5mkii with a Proper battery grip is a better deal than that Thing. Give the r3 the Same Software Like the r1 and their diffrences are so little that Nobody can Tell a Major diffrence.
I don't understand the Z9 and R1. Why not make ONLY the smaller body like the Z8 and sell a separate handle? Making two bodies is not good in terms of cost and the handle can provide any battery, grip and additional features.
Maybe I don't understand something, BUT! This Canon EOS R1 camera is exclusively for sports, birds, animals. very narrow specific application. You can’t go outside for a walk in the park with such a camera; it’s big and bulky >>>(This means that the Canon R1 can only be used at events where it is safe to carry such a large and expensive camera.) I have been using CANON R6-1 version for many years, I consider it the best for photography. Even after taking a canon r6II for several projects (for photography), I realized how much better the first version is. The most interesting thing is that CANON will never admit that they were two years late with the release of this R1 camera, and their sales will be very low compared to canon R6-I-, canon r6 mark ii
Total failure by canon. 24.2 megapixels?! I get that resolution isn't everything but I don't see how people will buy in to this system when there are other arguably better systems out there. Now I know why they didn't want any leaks .. it stinks.
I think there are several reasons for the "low" pixel count: 1. This camera is about speed. Fewer MP allow for more files written to the card in less time. The sensor heats up less when shooting bursts. The sensor can be read faster for higher frame rates, faster AF and less rolling shutter. 2. This camera is for photographers that either work for large agencies or rent the lenses they need for a given job. They usually don’t need to crop to the extend hobbyist wildlife photographers need to. If you don’t crop much 24 MP is plenty. Also the smaller file sizes allow them to send the pictures out faster on live events where the 1 series of cameras is typically used. The pictures won’t be used for big fine art print but in news, websites and magazines. 3. If you go above ISO 1000 it doesn’t really matter if you have more MP as any additional detail will just be lost in noise. These cameras likely spend much time at higher shutter speeds and therefore higher ISOs. 4. Canon seem to have implemented "cross-type" AF in this camera. AFAIK a first in mirrorless cameras. For previous Canon dual pixel AF cameras each pixel was split in two halves (left and right to detect phase shift of vertical contrast lines). If they did the cross-type AF in the R1 like in a Canon patent published last year, then they might have split each pixel in four (to detect phase shift for both vertical and horizontal contrast lines). This would mean the 24 MP R1 actually has 96 million active photo-diodes. More than the 90 million of the R5 (II) or the 51 million of the 5Ds(R).
@@floriang2801 I understand what you're saying but do you see people jumping from Nikon for this? The auto focus probably is very good, but everyone has been getting great shots for years. For me, I'm disappointed. I'll probably get a r5 mark ii sooner or later, but that's because of the slog2 video. It's just hard for me to think that canon can't knock it out of the park. Fujifilm, which is a much smaller company used the Sony sensor to get 102 megapixels with 16 bit depth. I know people said that the difference between 14 and 16 isn't noticeable, but it's gotta mean something. Canon is a HUGE company and I have no doubt that they could have done better
Wow, it's shaping up to be every bit the massive disappointment for wildlife shooters that it seemed it would be. Only if the autofocus blows everything else out of the water could it be worth an upgrade to me.
It does feel like Canon are *really* struggling with global shutter technology that was meant to sepaeate the R1 from the rest of the lineup and make it a proper flagship
The only thing that could've made this camera remotely exciting is the inclusion of CFExpress B 4.0 which they apparently didn't include. Maybe they can nickname this model the "Deja Vu"
i am the target market for this camera (sports shooter) and yeah it looks a bit underwhelming. Sure a great fast sensor and burst rate but i know many were hoping for a higher MP sensor - i certainly was as an r6mk2 and R5 owner i appreaciate the cropping ability when i need it and extra detail when i dont. $11k AUD for the R1 vs the $6600 for the R5mk2, when the latter offers a lot of the good features of the R1 (AF, eye-control, preburst etc), pretty sure i know which one i'll be pre-ordering.
I can't imagine why Canon would staple the R1 as their flagship camera, because clearly it is made to compete against the A9-III, which - aside from the in-camera uscaling and post editing NR - is never going to happen.
Месяц назад+2
just cancelled my preorder.. Thanks for honest review
@4:06 I don’t understand the relationship between 9.44M resolution and the resolution 2048x1536 in pixels. Those numbers don’t seem to correspond. Please clarify.
Meanwhile, most people have 2MP displays and fewer have 8 MP displays (4K UHD). The other thing that people can't seem to get into their heads is that larger pixel sizes have higher dynamic range (more colors) and less noise whereas higher pixel counts which make each pixel smaller are prone to noise and less color accuracy and many pixels are splotchy looking if you actually saw them unprocessed. Unless you make 30x40 enlargements and use the best glass ever made, you won't be able to make use of even 24 MP. If you have an 8K UHD display with the graphics card to handle it, that will allow you to see all of it. In other words, even at 24 MP, most pixels are thrown away. I just wish we could get away from the Bayer pattern. I did not get the one thing I came here to know and that is, will the R1 EOS adapter work on this model. Comparing between the R3 on Canon's website only lists the R3 as being able to use the adapter, it is not specified on the R1.
Holding out for the Canon flagship, R1 has been like waiting for Godot. One would think that given the time and the hype Canon could have offered up a site a little more auspicious than this lackluster location in Arizona. Couldn't have they been a bit more creative? It's like an afterthought thrown together on a Friday afternoon.
This means less rolling shutter affect for both still images and video. Yes, the R1 will have visually better control over high-speed object deformation than either Sony or Nikon flagship cameras! So basketballs and soccer balls and volleyballs are going to look rounder in motion on the Canon R1! That's a desirable advantage when you're trying to sell images to Sports Illustrated, for instance!
Did I read those specs right??? 24MP sensor?!?! ...and that's the flagship from Canon?!?! I mean, if it's aimed at journalists and sports, maybe that's not an issue, but kinda feels like some shade thrown for us landscape and portrait photogs (which is why I switched from Canon to Fuji to begin with.) R5 II is tempting at 50-ish MP, but if you look at "flagship" to "flagship" between Canon and Fuji, you can tell where each manufacturer's priorities lie. Seems moving to Fuji is still a good move on my part!
95% of my work is studio/outdoor portraits and though I don’t need it and won’t get it (this year or next) I’m really tempted by the camera body type (same with the R3/Z9) it just seems like joy to hold and use and feels way more robust than most other cameras. The specs are a bit average though (which has never stopped Canon from selling a gajillion units).
The Canon R1 sounds like a great sports/action and photojournalism oriented camera tailored specifically for the requirements of working professionals in those fields. The Canon R5 II sounds like a more versatile camera aimed at a wide range of photographers and videographers.
I don’t get the R1. If Canon already has the very capable R3. Why didn’t they just upgrade that to this spec, it has the same-res sensor after all (just seems logical 🤷♂️) and like the A1 and Z9, give the R1 similar specs, but at a much higher resolution? Making it a true multipurpose flagship camera.
Excellent introduction, the simplified AF setting is welcomed and I think that R1 is likely to have best AF of any brand at the moment, judging based on how my R8 performs and R1 is better than that.
I think Canon backed themselves in a corner. They had to call the original flagship camera the R3 because of the Sony A1. Now years later the they can make is an R3mii but because they’ve been getting trashed for not having an R1 all they can do is call their R3mii an R1. So they made the body bigger and added features around the sensor since sensor technology is where they are behind.
Even with all that hype, features, and marketing, the response on forums as been dismal, with many long time canon shooters now leaving canon 😂 exciting to see the Z9 II now that they acquired RED
Some things that seem neat which I don't understand are the upscaling and deep learning Auto exposure. If you have to upscale in camera as a sports and events guy I am not pausing to wait for an upscale nor will I want to pause and go through my pictures. Then when I'm done and at home I'm not going to go and upscale on the camera because I don't want to go through the images on the body just to go through and cull them on the computer right after. So If anything I would just up-res on my PC. I saw on B&H it has auto exposure with deep learning but as a professional photographer and for the others I'm friends with I don't care how advanced the auto exposure is I'm not taking it off of manual. The cameras certainly seem nice and they do have some good features. I shoot Sony A1 and A7RV but I can still totally respect the canon camera. I've been pretty excited to see how these will push Sony. In a hypothetical world if I had I was given the choice of a free R1 with glass to make it usable or second A1 for free I'm going with the A1. As I said I shoot Sony so my only expectation was that it would it compete with the A1 but I agree with that it doesn't look like it wants to and seems more like and R3 MK II. The R5 MKII looks pretty cool though. 5mp less than the A1 and also 30fps. I'm going to watch that now but strangely the not a flagship camera looks closer on paper to being a competitor to Sony's flagship than Canons own flagship.
What comes to mind is that 16 YEARS AGO MY NIKON D3X WAS ALREADY SHOOTING FULL FRAME 24MP. Yeah, it's been 16 years and my question is what are we doing here? For those still arguing where technology and innovation is going and why this is a helplessly dying business, think of what kind of photos and videos mobiles phones shot back then and what kind of photos and videos they take now. And let's not go to the "megapixels are just a small part of the equation" or you really need to go take emergency math lessons. I am not talking megapixels or that cameras are not getting better (at snail speed). I am talking about not being anything else to talk about in the camera world that is a dying fossil on its knees something that even the blind can clearly see.
Indeed, camera resolution hit “mature” 16 years ago. But let’s face it, the D3x was a one trick pony. It was ONLY about resolution. It didn’t even have sensor cleaning that the D3s had. What have we seen since the D3x? Higher pixels with better noise performance. 20 frames to fill the buffer back then now it’s infinite, essentially. Video features that would have been bleeding edge cinema technology 16 years ago. My point is the stills side of these cameras has matured a long time ago. It’s the surrounding tech that it’s light years ahead of where it was. Smart phones? Meh. Still can’t trigger a flash. Still takes seconds to find focus in dim light. They top out at ISO 250 for good IQ before heavy computing takes over.
People keep talking about phones photos and video, yet some cameras are struggling to meet demand like the Fuji X100 series, and different models from other brands too. Camera sales have boosted in recent years and that is because people realizes that as of now nothing beats the true magic of bigger sensors and bigger lenses. Zoom in to most pictures and video created with computational photography and they fall flat quick. I will agree that hopefully camera manufacturers will introduce more tech that is not just more megapixels or FPS.
lol Jared walked by in his “I shoot raw” shirt as they’re talking about the jpeg-only upscaling
@@arlenspatz6739 Jared just repeats the marketing talk and video.He is good at that
Oh lord is he STILL beating that dead horse? Come on
A useless clown
This was probably the most brutal take down in half a sentence I've heard from you guys. "I can not see to compete it with the Z9 or A1". Wow.
they just write it like it is...
@@bernardlanguillier65💯%
It wasn’t meant to be brutal, just how most people would see it. This seems fair to me since the clever advantages in focus, noise reduction and up scaling are useful but not headline grabbing...
It's true though! R1 cannot compete with the Z9 or A1 overall. I would put the R1 in the same category as the Z8, R3, a9-ii and a9-iii.
It’s going to have better AF and probably better low light capabilities. That’s about it. Rather than that, it’s really nothing special, especially when you put it next to the R5 MKii and the R3.
R3 mk2 is looking good, did Canon give any hints as to when they might releasing an R1?
oh boi thats rude :D
😂 so true funny
Hi sony fanboy
@@mbismbismb How do you know he's a Sony fanboy? Can he not be a Canon user who was hoping for something more, like a high-res pro body for birds and wildlife?
The way you Canon fans act like criticizing Canon is some crime against the almighty God is so strange.
@@fotografalexandernikolis Don't worry, I came home with a new battery for my 5d mk1 and I'm back in the good books.
Amazing how far ahead the Z9 was in 2021. I don’t think Nikon HQ is stressed at all with this R1 release. Let’s not forget the Z9 has more pixels but has the High Efficiency star RAW compression setting that makes those files the same size as 24mp files from Canon. And no need to AI upscale later. It’s already upscaled. This will be a really nice camera for Canon users though. I don’t see it attracting users from other brands however.
I'm sure there are lots of bird&wildlife shooters who wanted a high-res pro body like Z9. But with Canon, you cannot.
@@fotografalexandernikolis R5ii for example? 45mp is not enough for you?
@@christof4105 More expensive than Z8, while Nikon also has far better telephoto lineup.
"not enough for you?"
This here is the red flag I was waiting for. It proves that you cannot think outside your own use case, and think that any argument is inherently egoistical. I'm referring to the lots and lots of wildlife shooters who want a high-res pro body, just like Z9. Because I'm able to think beyond myself. It wasn't about me personally.
The most aggressive z9 compression reduces 45 mp RAW files to 9 mb... crazy. Thanks PICO.
@@fotografalexandernikolis You said there is no high mp body from canon. I just pointed out your lie. Not in the slightest i was talking about me or anything else you accused me of. If you disagree with me, attack my statement not me.
Sony can sit comfortably for another year or so to release the A1m2.
unfortunately...😁
Its dead already i barely see anyone use that camera
@@mbismbismb well yeah because the A1mk2 doesn't exist lol
@@mbismbismb there is no a1 mk2 yet , stop with the trolling
I'd say 3 LMAO
Hmm, makes you wonder if those rumors around the R3 being the R1 until the Sony A1 came out are true, this looks so much like an R3 update it's weird.
I've heard that the R3 was *always* the R3, it would be awfully hard to rebadge something halfway into mass production. I would almost argue the opposite, this sensor was developed as a potential R3 Mk II sensor, and the R1 project ran into some catastrophic issue with the sensor they planned to use, so the R3M2 sensor got put in the R1 body.
@@JMurph2015 that's very possible yes. But either way, it makes no sense to call the R3 an R3 and 3 years later the R1 an R1. They clearly belong to exactly the same line of cameras and the improved specs is exactly the kind of improvement we can expect in 3 years.
Yeah, you probably right. This is R1 MKII
Yup - I am firmly in the "Sony A1 suprised the F out of Canon" camp. I love my R3, and would really like if they would bring a few updates like CLog2 to it, but I think we all have a strong sense that now that they can call the R3 Mark II the R1, there is no real reason for an R3 to exist. That is, up until (and IF) they choose to do global shutter. If so, my money is on that landing in an R3 II.
@@galangpanjanayou mean R3 Mk2
You know what else has 24mpx, top notch AF, unlimited buffer and costs thousands of dollars less? Z6 iii. R1 is a tough sell
OM 1? 😂😉
Or the first gen R3. Skip the R3 mark II, oops, I mean R1.
You guys don’t get it do you? That extra $2000 for the R1 is going to give you improved autofocus…
@@hawaiifreespeechnewsit’s $4K more lol
Z6 iii doesn't have anything like a 1/300 sec scan speed. IIRC it's closer to 1/70 sec. If you don't see what makes those two cameras fundamentally different for things like sports then you're not a potential R1 (or Z9, or A1) customer anyway.
The more challenging comparisons are to the A9 III, which has the same resolution and an instantaneous global shutter, and to the Z9 and A1, which have E-shutters that are almost as fast with much higher resolution (and in the case of the A1 a mechanical shutter that is faster still).
I use the A1, and can vouch for the continued usefulness of the mechanical shutter in weird indoor lighting. I think Nikon whiffed by abandoning mechanical shutters in their lineup. Only global shutters like the A9 III's can truly enable that.
Should've been called R3 mark ii. Like Chris said this is more of a niche camera. R1 should have been in a leauge of its own, a real flagship like the Nikon Z9 and Sony A1. Master of all trade, not just for sports and wildlife.
Canon 1 was allways the low megapixel pro camera. Their flagship do-it-all is the 5.
@@weizenobstmusli8232 Then what is the R3 for?
and imagine if Z9 II will be announced like a week or two later and just completely smashing this camera 😢
Realistically:
- we will get a new firmware for Z8/Z9 within 2-3 weeks that will further improve the AF significantly and close the gap in such a way that it will be mostly irrelevant, if we are lucky we may get raw 30 fps, we will see,
- Nikon's new cloud service (the first one to get it really right) will give them access to a very large database of images to train their ai algorithms and the progress is going to be significantly faster moving forward,
- We will get a double Z9II announcement mid 2025. One will be based on a GS shutter sensor (either Sony or Red technology), the second one will be the logical successor of the Z9 with significant improvement in speed of operation. They will go at least 40 fps at 45mp and 2s pre-capture buffer. I expect also a brighter EVF like in the Z6III.
- The Z8II will follow 6 months later.
@@bernardlanguillier7970 I really wanna see comparison of DD in photo and video between Z6 IIi and A9 III, because a lot of youtubers keep showing like "yeah, z6 iii has worse dd than other cameras"
@@quite1enough I work with the a9III and it's fine overall, no difference beyond ISO800, it's only base ISO that has limited DR, even compared to the Z6III.
The built-in upscaling is a joke.
Simulated 45mp.😊
@@mlai2546 What for? No global shutter? I'm better off with my R5c or even the R5! Pointless and R1 is NOT BREAKTHROUGH without Global Shutter. Huge disappointment.
@pr1sm55 Canon is about 4 years behind Sony in terms of sensor technology. I am sure next iteration will be global shutter. Just need to be patient.
National Shutter > Global Shutter
I’m underwhelmed
Lol at 4:45 we see Fro from Fro Knows Photo passing by behind and having a meta-moment with fellow photo review journalism masters!
I believe I took the right decision earlier this year when I purchased the Nikon Z9, which in my opinion is the jack of all trades.
Bro that's the king of all trades
calling the z9 jack.. fml.
Same here. As a former Canon user (1Dx Mark II) I got tired of waiting for Canon to come out with a pro body high mp camera and got the Nikon Z9 instead
I think the A9iii is
@@L3ON360Z A9 iii is a specialized tool. sacrifices a lot of DR for that global shutter.
Great preview, guys. This pretty much confirms the "R3 was supposed to be the R1 but the Sony A1 scared them" theories. This is 95% an R3 Mark II, but with better card slots. Sadly, as an R3 owner who is not a sports shooter, I don't see a whole lot of reasons why this would interest me. I really was hoping for a 50-60MP monster camera that would let me use the big LP-E19 batteries for wildlife shooting, but I guess that's not happening. Ah well, can't win them all. (Though the R5 II does look like it would be a good second body vs an R7 for wildlife...)
100% 👍👍👍
Yeah, this doesn't make sense. Specs, price ... everything is indicating that this is the second gen R3. Very curious to see the full review about this camera later on.
The Peta Pixel Podcast is going to be intresting today...
The R1 is selling for 7,5k € (that's with 19% sales tax included) where I'm from. That is an outrages price for the tech you get in that body, even for professional users.
NO GLOBAL SHUTTER... 7,5k... what a ripoff! Technology from yesteryear!
Canon is not looking competitive anymore. Solidly outclassed by the much older Z9 and A1.
Not to be a hater but it looks like the slight disappointment I thought it would be. They've rushed it out for the Olympics, and it just doesn't measure up as a flagship camera compared to the competition.
We all know there'll be a Sony A1 MkII soon which will have incrementally better specs and double the megapixels. It's a tough sell.
The R5 II looks a far more compelling camera.
Hard sell for amateurs & Instagramers who can’t decide between Sony Canon or Fuji? Canon is targeting pros who already have a ton of Canon pro lenses. Even a new pro. They know how to take amazing photos with these machines, Canon or Sony. They aren’t worried.
@@snowwalker9999 So basically, Canon are exploiting their market momentum to be lazy and release lesser specs for higher price, because they're "too big to fail, and the already invested customers have no other choice anyway". The fact that you are actually admitting to supporting such a distrustful business strategy speaks volumes. If Canon are so great, then that greatness by logic should be a reason to expect MORE of them, not as an excuse to expect less. The fact that fans like you excuse this laziness as if you're somehow benefitting from it, when in reality it's the complete opposite, is seriously zealously sect-like.
Of course these bodies are great, but they're overpriced.
@@fotografalexandernikolis Canon has a camera for every level even every level content creators. This is a totally different camera targeting different crowd than the average consumers you’re talking about. I’m comparing apple with apple. Now when it comes to cameras for average consumers I agree, Canon isn’t the most thoughtful company. You could say they just don’t care. I’ve said it here on RUclips a couple of times shame on you canon. All I’m saying is that a professional doesn’t care about little things and I’m sure he or she would enjoy this camera.
@@fotografalexandernikolis Yep. I've responded to things like this forever. It's so wild that Canon fans will sit here and defend this. I've seen this argument for so long about how "pros for years have been shooting on 20mp cameras" but that was over a decade ago. Why sit here and settle for complacency and laziness? Why objectively handicap yourself in your creative workflow?
It's mind boggling that people will sit here and defend this. Sure you can get good photos, but again you're objectively handicapping your workflow. It makes no sense. Completely agree with you.
I've been waiting for A1M2 since I got my hands on A7R5, now with Canon's new release, I think Sony just have the newly created A1M2 folder deleted.
I feel sorry for the photographers who sold their R3 before the announcement...
I suspect they will all switch to Nikon 😂
@@jaegerschtulmann As a Canon only-buyer... I feel Canon has betrayed us with this piece of yesteryear. No Global Shutter, what are they thinking? At this point they are trying to ripoff people.
@@pr1sm55Too many issues with Global shutter at this point.
@@alansach8437 I have literally no idea what issues and am very curious. I always argue that Global Shutter should have been there a lot sooner. I thought Global Shutter is perfect. What disadvantages or problems technically as of now?
Canon's problem is they still have the mindset from the DSLR days where you could either have high frame rate or high megapixels. But Nikon showed that that Dichotomy is false by having their two high end cameras just be different form factors with the same internals... when all cameras can be fast and high megapixel, there's no reason for a low megapixel high fps camera to be the "top" of their lineup. Rather it should be priced below the flagship high mp high fps camera (R5ii, Z9, A1), maybe around £3000 max, and have all the specs of those but with lower megapixels for those who don't need the extra resolution (i.e. sports shooters). Then, you can round out the lineup with high and low resolution unstacked sensors for portrait/landscape/still life photographers who don't need high speed features, akin to the Z6 and Z7, at maybe £1500 and £2000 or something.
Completely agree. This is essentially Sonys lineup. A1 fast and high megapixels. A9iii low megapixel but obvious as fast as possible with global shutter. A7R high megapixels but not as fast. A7 hybrid camera middle of the road all rounder. A7S extremely low megapixels for low light and video (which will probably become obsolete as all cameras are getting better at low light and video)
4:40 Who's that cro magnon photobombing Chris? Krub know photo! Argg! 🙂
😂😂😂
Probably a social media pixel peeper who escaped from his basement.
Was just about to comment on the same thing 😂
So an a9iii competitor without global shutter
U mean the lousy DR and poor low light a9iii?
@@mbismbismb for the target user, dr and noise at low light is not a main concern for them
@@mbismbismb We get it. You spent countless nights working on the R1. Put the keyboard away and go to sleep.
@@mbismbismb hey guys caught one🎣😂😉
@@mbismbismb since Canon is baking in NR in their raw files at base ISO, we have no idea how poor the sensor DR is... but if they developed in camera NR we can assume is still pretty bad. So there is no way to tell if the a9III is better or worse. Blame Canon for removing the possibility to shoot actual raw with their cameras.
10:17 You said exactly what I was thinking. This is an R3 Mark II, not a flagship camera. A1 and Z9 blow it away!
z8 does too. z6 iii comes darn close
This is a flagship?...
Sony and Nikon can sleep soundly.
Edit: And it's $6,300 USD?! 🤣
i think that canon always lagged behind sony and nikon with image sensors quality
Sony and Nikon broke the mold. Their flagship mirrorless cameras are high megapixel do-everything bodies that excel at everything. Canon was last to release theirs and it’s the worst. Same old sports/wildlife speed demon but not the best at anything else. Swing and a miss.
Are we comparing nikonz6lll vs Canon R1. People were complaining about z6III for 24 mp, Lol canon flagship(so called, long awaited, over hyped).
z8, z9, least to mention z6III huge win for Nikon.
Video 6k is a joke as well...
Clearly canon has set their bar so low...
It's a R3 II. That's it.
So, what does this camera have that the R5 II doesn’t ?
- AF modes for basketball, football and volleyball
- Faster sensor, but R5II sensor is still not slow.
- 40 instead of 30 fps
- traditionally for the 1D series a little more torque for autofocus...
And that's it ?
It seems we have come full circle and sports cameras no longer claim to be universal.
The R5 II is truly a "top camera" here.
I‘m happy with my R3 and can safe the upgrade-money for better glass. Thanks Canon for only bring a R3 mk 2.
This is an R3II. If the R3 had been called an R1, all of this would have made sense for the past few years.
I laughed seeing Jared in the background. Was that intentional? That was funny :)
I got sick up in my mouth when I saw him
@@jukeboxjohnniewhy?
I really have to say that as a day-one adopter of the Z9 and as someone that has used it almost every day since then, the R1 is really kind of underwhelming. Personally I think the Z9 (and the A1/A9ii, for sure) have set the bar so high for the ultra-premium and professional mirrorless market that anything less than that is simply not a contender. The R1 edges out the Z9 in a couple of features but it's very surprising how many ways it falls short, at least in my opinion, especially given how much we expected from Canon after the R3 was released. I was absolutely betting on a 45+ megapixel sensor, 8K30+ video, and if I'm honest, a lot of the same or better features that already exist in other flagship-tier bodies. I can't help but think that Canon really misplayed their hand by splitting up what could have been an absolute juggernaut of a product, on par with or surpassing the Z9, by dividing up the best features of that product between the R1 and R5ii.
My absolute favorite thing about the Z9 is that it can do ANYTHING. That is now the standard for this tier of product. And, like Chris, I just don't think the R1 is versatile enough to say the same, which is all the more confusing when it was pitched as a "jack of all trades, master of everything" camera.
I honestly don't see any reason to buy canon anymore, except if you already have expensive glass on hand. They're lagging behind and still very expensive.
The r5 is still better than most cameras. What’s killing them is their prices, otherwise they are plenty as good as the competition.
@@Yupthereitism Better than most cameras that are in "lower" classes than itself, but that isn't really a selling point. Might as well buy a Z8.
@@praetorian65 id buy the r5 over the z8 for flash work, events, and landscape. Id buy the z6iii over the z8 though.
@@Yupthereitismthey lenses are so expensive that whatever you save on the body you will spend so much more on the lens
@@Yupthereitismnah mate you are clueless really. I can understand the flash argument but for anything else the z8 is the superior camera. that said the R5 is fantastic but it is not a z8
Thoroughly unimpressed with this mediocre release from Canon.
Don't get me wrong, it will work great. That said... THIS took 5 yrs and that's it?
Poor fellas have to play soccer indoors in Arizona cause it’s like 110/43 degrees outside.
This camera is 3yrs late. If it came out when z9 and a1 was released then it would e been relevant but sadly this camera is even more niche than a9iii.
Huh... This thing only competing and not surpassing the Z9 in meaningful ways is painful, since the Z9 is from 2021...
5:17 uprez the 24MP files so it can compete with A1 and Z9 that have a sensor that is natiely 2x the megapixels is dumb!
No one is choosing this over the a9iii
This camera’s sensor has full area cross type autofocus points which is potentially the game changer for mirrorless cameras
This would only be attractive to people already in the system. Going in new, Nikon and Sony seem better.
It's more of a R3 Mark II than what I would have expected for an R1.
@4:44 Jared is photo bombing 😂😂
I feel like, while it probably doesn’t actually matter, the fact that Canon’s flagships in the R1, R3 have lowish 24mp counts hurts in marketing. The competition Z8, Z9, a1 all have about double. And while in practice the difference is probably small, psychologically it just hurts. It’s just a bummer when the first number on the spec sheet is smaller.
Or look at the OM-1; not in the same league, but there’s a lesson. Its stacked sensor had a lot of advantages over other Olympus cameras, but the same MP count, so the first impression was often that it wasn’t any better.
While the old megapixel race is mostly kinda pointless, people still want to see the big number go up. That’s why the megapixel race got started in the first place. Even if this was a 26 or 28mp sensor compared to then 24mp of the R3 and R6 mark ii, I think that tiny bump would have a bigger impact on perception than the effect on images.
@@thebitterfig9903 I totally agree. Personally, even if the camera sensor was at 40mp, that is a failure. The Camera is competing with Sony’s 50mp and Nikon’s 45mp, not with the 1DX Mark III’s 20mp.
Kinda agree with slight bump in MP. 30 MP maybe would improve the overall perception of this camera
For eye control (on the R3 anyway) I’ve found that once you delete the profile (even when there isn’t one listed) and recalibrate a few times, it works almost flawlessly! If I’m not taking photos of subjects, I make sure to turn subject detection off (I have a button for this).
RUclips Tip: Always use your own merch on video. Especially cool ones with cool art. And always quickly mention “the cool merch” you’re using in the video and how people can get it.
I believe in you 🤣
lol the r1 is a massive disappointment tbh. Nikon and Sony are now bullying canon 😂
Chris getting photo bombed again!! @ 4.45
Yeah, most EOS 1D models (apart from the 1Ds series) were rather low resolution high-speed models for sports or harsh outdoor conditions. So it's not surprising to me the R1 is going a similar way. But I guess I can just as well live with my R6 Mark II, which may lack a few features but actually still has quite a lot of similar base specs.
Very curious why Canon’s execs decided on two products to serve the same market in the R3 and R1.
In ways it might have been better brand perception wise vs Nikon and Sony for them to have delayed the R1 release to bring out a full featured throw everything at it model and quietly move this for a R3II or “R3S” instead.
That the R1 became a mystical meme the better. That the A1Ii is out and still no R1.
IMO almost everyone would have imagined the R1 like to be an all guns blazing halo model. Almost like a A1++ given the larger dual grip design. This being the R1 doesn’t help Canon show its really trading blows with Sony on the technology front like it did with Nikon back in the day.
All these doesn’t stop the R1 from possibly being a capable and useful camera tool for its intended users but it doesn’t represent the confidence boost many are wanting from the brand. Their interesting lenses also need an exciting platform.
R1II - complete overhaul. Go toe to toe with the A1II/III, Z9II/III with a halo product that shows this is what Canon R&D, design, manufacturing, user feedback can produce
R3II: Sports, bring the R1 features to the R3II
R6III: Baby R3II. Release with the R3II. Go toe to toe with A75; given IMO Sony dropped the ball on A74 coming from the incredible A73.
R5III: Image quality + workflow. Be the preferred choice for commercial pros. Flash sync, tethering (wired and wireless), video, high resolution stills, remote shooting, flip+tilt rear screen, EVF and rear display quality and spec, IBIS, RAW histogram and playback etc as areas to focus on because these specs matter to pros and can help push the envelope on what they can deliver, especially vs “AI” software
R8II: Value option for prosumers. Not approached as watered down, “cripple hammer” but designed from ground up to meet those needs.
R7II: Baby R5II? Given there’s a VR lens for it. Makes sense for it to be an option for working pros on a smaller budget. IMO R7 should have been FF and Canon to develop both high end and price accessible lenses. But since it’s a APSC, maybe a RF to RF-S speedbooster + a set of zooms covering 24-150mm f3.2 FF equivalent? + reconfigure M series primes
I would contest the a74 being bad. It isn't, it's a camera with one of if not the best dr while having 33 mp. Sony never wanted it to be fast, only high quality, and it definately delivers on that
I'm convinced that the global shutter is a go to technology today if you are making a top tier sports camera today , this must become a new standard and be more affordable and wide spread, let's make companies know what we really want
How is this not an R3 MkII? Very tough sell...
seems it is time for canon to order some Sony sensors.....
Discussion for the Podcast:
Do you think the R1 would have felt more like a flagship if it shared the sensor with the R5mkII? It would still have larger buffer, better battery life, better heat distribution, two cfexpress type-B card slots and so on. Maybe saving this sensor for a R3mkII. Do you think this means Canon is done with the R3 line, or maybe they will develop it into a global shutter like Sony did with the their a9 series?
Thanks for your thoughts.
At least my Pentax K3 with 24Mpix still looks ok :D
OMG it has 10% faster scan speed than a much cheaper camera that has double the megapixels... is anyone else not impressed by this spec? AI noise reduction on RAWs... Nooooooooooooo!!!!
Are u ok sony fanboy?
@@mbismbismb Dude, that has nothing to do with "fanboy" of some brand. This specs are not that impressive as they want it to sell to us.
@@IJAY2509am not seeing canon targeting you with this camera, else it would be £2500 maybe.. Its totally not targetted to you. There are people who really need a super fast and reliable camera in conditions normal people like you wont need. Its really a tank and i guess thats what you people dont realise here.. Ask a 1D war journalist how much there camera have been battered to the extremes, ask a sport photographer how fast they need to send exclusive pictures to their agency during the olympics. This isnt a prosumer camera.
@@sarbelv1lo Bro, this r 1 is Just a slightly better r3, call IT r3mk2 and the people would Not that disappointed about that Thing. Every Canon Body is build Like Tank. Even their also fresh released r5mkii with a Proper battery grip is a better deal than that Thing. Give the r3 the Same Software Like the r1 and their diffrences are so little that Nobody can Tell a Major diffrence.
Absof...lutely 🤣🤣🤣
I don't understand the Z9 and R1. Why not make ONLY the smaller body like the Z8 and sell a separate handle? Making two bodies is not good in terms of cost and the handle can provide any battery, grip and additional features.
Jared: "Where am I? This isn't my youtube channel."
Why would I get this over the a9 III?
7000 EUR for R1 vs 3500 for Z8 and 4400 for Z9 in Europe. And for what? Doing what Sony did 5 years ago?
Jarron in the background trying to dip out of frame really fast haha
I can’t wait to pick up the R3 for about 3k. What a bargain.
Jared Polin in the background. 🤣🤣
This r3 mark ii looks decent, bit of a let down compared to the a9iii. When is canon releasing the promised flagship?
Maybe I don't understand something, BUT! This Canon EOS R1 camera is exclusively for sports, birds, animals. very narrow specific application. You can’t go outside for a walk in the park with such a camera; it’s big and bulky >>>(This means that the Canon R1 can only be used at events where it is safe to carry such a large and expensive camera.) I have been using CANON R6-1 version for many years, I consider it the best for photography. Even after taking a canon r6II for several projects (for photography), I realized how much better the first version is. The most interesting thing is that CANON will never admit that they were two years late with the release of this R1 camera, and their sales will be very low compared to canon R6-I-, canon r6 mark ii
Total failure by canon. 24.2 megapixels?! I get that resolution isn't everything but I don't see how people will buy in to this system when there are other arguably better systems out there. Now I know why they didn't want any leaks .. it stinks.
The previous cameras in this line had similar resolutions:
2007, 1Ds III: 21 MP
2012, 1DX: 18 MP
2016, 1DX II: 20 MP
2020, 1DX III: 20 MP
2021, R3: 24 MP
2024, R1: 24 MP
I think there are several reasons for the "low" pixel count:
1. This camera is about speed. Fewer MP allow for more files written to the card in less time. The sensor heats up less when shooting bursts. The sensor can be read faster for higher frame rates, faster AF and less rolling shutter.
2. This camera is for photographers that either work for large agencies or rent the lenses they need for a given job. They usually don’t need to crop to the extend hobbyist wildlife photographers need to. If you don’t crop much 24 MP is plenty. Also the smaller file sizes allow them to send the pictures out faster on live events where the 1 series of cameras is typically used. The pictures won’t be used for big fine art print but in news, websites and magazines.
3. If you go above ISO 1000 it doesn’t really matter if you have more MP as any additional detail will just be lost in noise. These cameras likely spend much time at higher shutter speeds and therefore higher ISOs.
4. Canon seem to have implemented "cross-type" AF in this camera. AFAIK a first in mirrorless cameras. For previous Canon dual pixel AF cameras each pixel was split in two halves (left and right to detect phase shift of vertical contrast lines). If they did the cross-type AF in the R1 like in a Canon patent published last year, then they might have split each pixel in four (to detect phase shift for both vertical and horizontal contrast lines). This would mean the 24 MP R1 actually has 96 million active photo-diodes. More than the 90 million of the R5 (II) or the 51 million of the 5Ds(R).
@@floriang2801the fact that you include the R3 shows that you don't get it...
@@floriang2801 I understand what you're saying but do you see people jumping from Nikon for this? The auto focus probably is very good, but everyone has been getting great shots for years. For me, I'm disappointed. I'll probably get a r5 mark ii sooner or later, but that's because of the slog2 video. It's just hard for me to think that canon can't knock it out of the park. Fujifilm, which is a much smaller company used the Sony sensor to get 102 megapixels with 16 bit depth. I know people said that the difference between 14 and 16 isn't noticeable, but it's gotta mean something. Canon is a HUGE company and I have no doubt that they could have done better
How much more capacity do the LP-E6P batteries offer?
At 04:45 Jared Polin passing by... lol.
Wow, it's shaping up to be every bit the massive disappointment for wildlife shooters that it seemed it would be. Only if the autofocus blows everything else out of the water could it be worth an upgrade to me.
It does feel like Canon are *really* struggling with global shutter technology that was meant to sepaeate the R1 from the rest of the lineup and make it a proper flagship
Agree! No room now for an R3Mkii . R3 has nowhere to go with improvements without compromising Canon's other models.
The only thing that could've made this camera remotely exciting is the inclusion of CFExpress B 4.0 which they apparently didn't include. Maybe they can nickname this model the "Deja Vu"
i am the target market for this camera (sports shooter) and yeah it looks a bit underwhelming.
Sure a great fast sensor and burst rate but i know many were hoping for a higher MP sensor - i certainly was as an r6mk2 and R5 owner i appreaciate the cropping ability when i need it and extra detail when i dont.
$11k AUD for the R1 vs the $6600 for the R5mk2, when the latter offers a lot of the good features of the R1 (AF, eye-control, preburst etc), pretty sure i know which one i'll be pre-ordering.
Doesn't matter that you are underwhelmed, you are still giving them your money anyway....
@@christophercarlimages9003 yes money in exchange for goods and services - who would have thought
I can't imagine why Canon would staple the R1 as their flagship camera, because clearly it is made to compete against the A9-III, which - aside from the in-camera uscaling and post editing NR - is never going to happen.
just cancelled my preorder.. Thanks for honest review
oh craps here goes my A1M2
@4:06 I don’t understand the relationship between 9.44M resolution and the resolution 2048x1536 in pixels.
Those numbers don’t seem to correspond. Please clarify.
It's because they count each of the RGB subpixels as individual "dots".
2048 x 1536 x 3 = 9.44M
Meanwhile, most people have 2MP displays and fewer have 8 MP displays (4K UHD). The other thing that people can't seem to get into their heads is that larger pixel sizes have higher dynamic range (more colors) and less noise whereas higher pixel counts which make each pixel smaller are prone to noise and less color accuracy and many pixels are splotchy looking if you actually saw them unprocessed. Unless you make 30x40 enlargements and use the best glass ever made, you won't be able to make use of even 24 MP. If you have an 8K UHD display with the graphics card to handle it, that will allow you to see all of it. In other words, even at 24 MP, most pixels are thrown away. I just wish we could get away from the Bayer pattern.
I did not get the one thing I came here to know and that is, will the R1 EOS adapter work on this model. Comparing between the R3 on Canon's website only lists the R3 as being able to use the adapter, it is not specified on the R1.
4:42 froknowsphotooooo
Holding out for the Canon flagship, R1 has been like waiting for Godot. One would think that given the time and the hype Canon could have offered up a site a little more auspicious than this lackluster location in Arizona. Couldn't have they been a bit more creative? It's like an afterthought thrown together on a Friday afternoon.
Will someone please show Chris how to hold a camera with a vertical grip - it is painful to watch!
"Hey everyone, Chris Niccolls here, and LOOKIE WHAT I'VE GOT!"
😁
R1 Sensor Readout Speed 2.7ms vs Sony a1 4.2ms and Nikon Z9 4.0ms readout. That's thanks to the new "Digic Accellerator".
This means less rolling shutter affect for both still images and video. Yes, the R1 will have visually better control over high-speed object deformation than either Sony or Nikon flagship cameras! So basketballs and soccer balls and volleyballs are going to look rounder in motion on the Canon R1!
That's a desirable advantage when you're trying to sell images to Sports Illustrated, for instance!
My dream camera 📸
Did I read those specs right??? 24MP sensor?!?! ...and that's the flagship from Canon?!?! I mean, if it's aimed at journalists and sports, maybe that's not an issue, but kinda feels like some shade thrown for us landscape and portrait photogs (which is why I switched from Canon to Fuji to begin with.) R5 II is tempting at 50-ish MP, but if you look at "flagship" to "flagship" between Canon and Fuji, you can tell where each manufacturer's priorities lie. Seems moving to Fuji is still a good move on my part!
I agree. I'd like to see 30MP
95% of my work is studio/outdoor portraits and though I don’t need it and won’t get it (this year or next) I’m really tempted by the camera body type (same with the R3/Z9) it just seems like joy to hold and use and feels way more robust than most other cameras.
The specs are a bit average though (which has never stopped Canon from selling a gajillion units).
The Canon R1 sounds like a great sports/action and photojournalism oriented camera tailored specifically for the requirements of working professionals in those fields. The Canon R5 II sounds like a more versatile camera aimed at a wide range of photographers and videographers.
You work for Canon bro? Sounds like corporate BS
It really feels like a R3 II. Same like when Nikon released Z7II, slightly "better".
I don’t get the R1. If Canon already has the very capable R3. Why didn’t they just upgrade that to this spec, it has the same-res sensor after all (just seems logical 🤷♂️) and like the A1 and Z9, give the R1 similar specs, but at a much higher resolution? Making it a true multipurpose flagship camera.
Excellent introduction, the simplified AF setting is welcomed and I think that R1 is likely to have best AF of any brand at the moment, judging based on how my R8 performs and R1 is better than that.
I think Canon backed themselves in a corner. They had to call the original flagship camera the R3 because of the Sony A1. Now years later the they can make is an R3mii but because they’ve been getting trashed for not having an R1 all they can do is call their R3mii an R1. So they made the body bigger and added features around the sensor since sensor technology is where they are behind.
Jarred Polin 🥳
In a world where the a9III, Z8 and Z9 exist, where does this fit?
Looks DOA to me.
Even with all that hype, features, and marketing, the response on forums as been dismal, with many long time canon shooters now leaving canon 😂 exciting to see the Z9 II now that they acquired RED
Looks pretty nice! 👍 No global shutter sensor, but I'm not surprised.
Some things that seem neat which I don't understand are the upscaling and deep learning Auto exposure. If you have to upscale in camera as a sports and events guy I am not pausing to wait for an upscale nor will I want to pause and go through my pictures. Then when I'm done and at home I'm not going to go and upscale on the camera because I don't want to go through the images on the body just to go through and cull them on the computer right after. So If anything I would just up-res on my PC.
I saw on B&H it has auto exposure with deep learning but as a professional photographer and for the others I'm friends with I don't care how advanced the auto exposure is I'm not taking it off of manual.
The cameras certainly seem nice and they do have some good features. I shoot Sony A1 and A7RV but I can still totally respect the canon camera. I've been pretty excited to see how these will push Sony. In a hypothetical world if I had I was given the choice of a free R1 with glass to make it usable or second A1 for free I'm going with the A1. As I said I shoot Sony so my only expectation was that it would it compete with the A1 but I agree with that it doesn't look like it wants to and seems more like and R3 MK II.
The R5 MKII looks pretty cool though. 5mp less than the A1 and also 30fps. I'm going to watch that now but strangely the not a flagship camera looks closer on paper to being a competitor to Sony's flagship than Canons own flagship.
What comes to mind is that 16 YEARS AGO MY NIKON D3X WAS ALREADY SHOOTING FULL FRAME 24MP. Yeah, it's been 16 years and my question is what are we doing here? For those still arguing where technology and innovation is going and why this is a helplessly dying business, think of what kind of photos and videos mobiles phones shot back then and what kind of photos and videos they take now. And let's not go to the "megapixels are just a small part of the equation" or you really need to go take emergency math lessons. I am not talking megapixels or that cameras are not getting better (at snail speed). I am talking about not being anything else to talk about in the camera world that is a dying fossil on its knees something that even the blind can clearly see.
Indeed, camera resolution hit “mature” 16 years ago. But let’s face it, the D3x was a one trick pony. It was ONLY about resolution. It didn’t even have sensor cleaning that the D3s had. What have we seen since the D3x? Higher pixels with better noise performance. 20 frames to fill the buffer back then now it’s infinite, essentially. Video features that would have been bleeding edge cinema technology 16 years ago. My point is the stills side of these cameras has matured a long time ago. It’s the surrounding tech that it’s light years ahead of where it was. Smart phones? Meh. Still can’t trigger a flash. Still takes seconds to find focus in dim light. They top out at ISO 250 for good IQ before heavy computing takes over.
I'm sure the 24 mp on the R1 is much sharper than ur nikon... plus it has upscaling tech
People keep talking about phones photos and video, yet some cameras are struggling to meet demand like the Fuji X100 series, and different models from other brands too.
Camera sales have boosted in recent years and that is because people realizes that as of now nothing beats the true magic of bigger sensors and bigger lenses.
Zoom in to most pictures and video created with computational photography and they fall flat quick.
I will agree that hopefully camera manufacturers will introduce more tech that is not just more megapixels or FPS.
appreciate the vid! re: Neural NR, is that on a one-by-one image basis in-camera only?